Digital transformation in musculoskeletal ultrasound : acceptability of blended learning
dc.contributor.author | Weimer, Andreas Michael | |
dc.contributor.author | Berthold, Rainer | |
dc.contributor.author | Schamberger, Christian | |
dc.contributor.author | Vieth, Thomas | |
dc.contributor.author | Balser, Gerd | |
dc.contributor.author | Berthold, Svenja | |
dc.contributor.author | Stein, Stephan | |
dc.contributor.author | Müller, Lukas | |
dc.contributor.author | Merkel, Daniel | |
dc.contributor.author | Recker, Florian | |
dc.contributor.author | Schmidmaier, Gerhard | |
dc.contributor.author | Rink, Maximilian | |
dc.contributor.author | Künzel, Julian | |
dc.contributor.author | Kloeckner, Roman | |
dc.contributor.author | Weimer, Johannes | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-02-19T10:44:10Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-02-19T10:44:10Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: ultrasound diagnostics have a broad spectrum of applications, including among diseases of the musculoskeletal system. Accordingly, it is important for the users to have a well-founded and up-to-date education in this dynamic examination method. The right balance between online and in-class teaching still needs to be explored in this context. Certifying institutions are currently testing digitally transformed teaching concepts to provide more evidence. Methods: this study compared two musculoskeletal ultrasound blended learning models. Model A was more traditional, with a focus on in-person teaching, while Model B was more digitally oriented with compulsory webinar. Both used e-learning for preparation. Participants completed evaluations using a seven-point Likert scale, later converted to a 0–1 scale. Digital teaching media (e-learning) were used for preparation in both courses. Results: the analysis included n = 41 evaluations for Model A and n = 30 for Model B. Model B received a better overall assessment (median: 0.73 vs. 0.69, p = 0.05). Model B also excelled in “course preparation” (p = 0.02), “webinar quality” (p = 0.04), and “course concept” (p = 0.04). The “gain of competence” (p = 0.82), “learning materials” (p = 0.30), and “tutor quality” (p = 0.28) showed no significant differences. Conclusion: participants favorably assessed blended learning in ultrasound teaching. Certifying institutions should consider accrediting models that combine digital methods (e.g., internet lectures/webinars) and materials (e.g., e-learning) with hands-on ultrasound training. Further research is needed to validate these subjective findings for a stronger evidential basis. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-10052 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/10070 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | de |
dc.rights | CC-BY-4.0 | * |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medizin | de_DE |
dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medical sciences | en_GB |
dc.title | Digital transformation in musculoskeletal ultrasound : acceptability of blended learning | en_GB |
dc.type | Zeitschriftenaufsatz | de |
jgu.journal.issue | 20 | de |
jgu.journal.title | Diagnostics | de |
jgu.journal.volume | 13 | de |
jgu.organisation.department | FB 04 Medizin | de |
jgu.organisation.name | Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz | |
jgu.organisation.number | 2700 | |
jgu.organisation.place | Mainz | |
jgu.organisation.ror | https://ror.org/023b0x485 | |
jgu.pages.alternative | 3272 | de |
jgu.publisher.doi | 10.3390/diagnostics13203272 | de |
jgu.publisher.issn | 2075-4418 | de |
jgu.publisher.name | MDPI | de |
jgu.publisher.place | Basel | de |
jgu.publisher.year | 2023 | |
jgu.rights.accessrights | openAccess | |
jgu.subject.ddccode | 610 | de |
jgu.subject.dfg | Multidisciplinary | de |
jgu.type.contenttype | Scientific article | de |
jgu.type.dinitype | Article | en_GB |
jgu.type.resource | Text | de |
jgu.type.version | Published version | de |