Evaluation of the Perceptions of Forensic Medicine Residents for Hospital Education Environment
    PDF
    Cite
    Share
    Request
    Original Research
    P: 164-170
    December 2021

    Evaluation of the Perceptions of Forensic Medicine Residents for Hospital Education Environment

    The Bulletin of Legal Medicine 2021;26(3):164-170
    1. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Adli Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Manisa, Türkiye
    2. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Adli Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye
    3. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Anabilim Dalı, Denizli, Türkiye
    4. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Adli Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Denizli, Türkiye
    No information available.
    No information available
    Received Date: 15.08.2020
    Accepted Date: 16.03.2021
    Publish Date: 01.12.2021
    PDF
    Cite
    Share
    Request

    ABSTRACT

    Objective:

    The learning environment is the key to successful education. By evaluating learning environment, strong parts and parts that need improvement in education process can be revealed. Various scales have been developed in order to evaluate this issue. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate educational environments of two different departments of forensic medicine [Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine and Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine (HUFM)] using a standard scale, to compare the differences and to investigate the reasons.

    Methods:

    The data of the study were collected using a data collection tool consisting of two parts. First, residents participating in the study were asked for demographic information on their university, gender and academic year. Second, the Postgraduate Hospital Educational Environment Measure (PHEEM) was applied. The distribution and scores for the items and subtitles were calculated.

    Results:

    Total score of the participants was 131.85 (±22.93) (perfect education environment), mean perception of professional autonomy subgroup score was 46.61 (±8.04) (excellent), mean perception of education subgroup score was 50.91 (±8.71) (excellent) and mean social support perception subgroup score was 34.32 (±7.11) (environment that supports learning). When scores were compared between two departments, it was observed that mean scores of HUFM were significantly higher.

    Conclusion:

    Our study is the first study in which educational environments of residents who are trained in forensic medicine are evaluated. It was determined that average scores obtained in both departments were higher than other studies conducted in different specialties in our country. It has been demonstrated that PHEEM can be used to identify and correct the problems in forensic specialty training environment and to increase quality of forensic specialty training.

    Keywords: Forensic medicine residency, postgraduate medical education, clinical training environment

    References

    1
    Yılmaz, ND. Tıp Öğrencilerinin Öğrenme İklimi Algılarının; Akademik öz yeterlik, hekimlik mesleğine yönelik tutum ve akademik başarı açısından incelenmesi [Doktora Tezi]. İzmir, Ege Üniversitesi; 2010.
    2
    Balkan A. Hemşirelik yüksekokulu öğrencilerinin klinik öğrenme iklimi algılarının akademik başarıya etkisinin değerlendirilmesi [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi; 2015.
    3
    Roff S, McAleer S. What is educational climate? Med Teach. 2001;23(4):333-334.
    4
    Yılmaz ND. Learning enviroment and learning climate in postgraduate medical Education. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Educ Special Topics. 2016;1:1-7.
    5
    Kara CO, Gürpınar E. Evaluation of clinical learning climate ın a flipped classroom Implementation. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası. 2018;17(53):24-40.
    6
    Zeybek V, Acar K, Kurtuluş Dereli A, Kara CO. Yapılandırılmış senaryo eşliğinde maket üzerinde adli ölü muayenesi eğitiminin değerlendirilmesi. The Bulletin of Legal Medicine. 2018;23(1):6-12.
    7
    Terzi C. Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Tıpta Uzmanlık Eğitimi, I. Tıpta Uzmanlık Eğitimi Programlama Uygulama Değerlendirme Çalıştayı Eğitim Notları, TTB UDEK UYEK, 5-10 Kasım 2004 Ankara; 2004.
    8
    WFME. Quality Improvement In Postgraduate Medical Education: Task Force On Defining International Standards In Postgraduate Medical Education, Report Of The Working Party. Copenhagen; 2001.
    9
    Balcıoğlu H. Tıpta uzmanlık öğrencilerinin eğitim ortamı algılamaları ve buna etkili faktörlerin değerlendirilmesi [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi; 2008.
    10
    Atılgan B, Taşdelen Teker G, Sezer S, Yeşiltepe M, Odabaşı O. Hacettepe Üniversitesi’nde tıpta uzmanlık öğrencilerinin klinik eğitim ortamlarına ilişkin algılarının değerlendirilmesi. STED/Sürekli Tıp Eğitimi Dergisi. 2020;29(1):44-53.
    11
    Genn JM. AMEE medical education guide no. 23 (part 1): Curriculum, environment, climate, quality and change in medical education a unifying perspective. Med Teach. 2001;23(4):337-344.
    12
    Mohanna K, Cottrell E, Chambers R, Wall D, editors. Teaching made easy: a manual for health professionals. 3rd ed. Abingdon: Radcliffe Publishing; 2011.
    13
    Harden RM, editor. Educational Environment. A practical guide for medical teachers. 4th ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2011.
    14
    Aktaş EÖ. Specialisation in forensic medicine advances and changes. The Bulletin of Legal Medicine. 2015;20(3). doi: 10.17986/blm.2015314254. (Ahead of print)
    15
    Roff S, McAleer S, Skinner A. Development and validation of an instrument to measure the postgraduate clinical learning and teaching educational environment for hospital-based junior doctors in the UK. Med Teach. 2005;27:326-331.
    16
    Sezik M, Savran M, Kara CO, Alimoğlu M. Assessment of hospital educational environment perceptions of obstetrics and gynecology residents in specialty and subspecialty training. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası. 2020;19(57):64-75.
    17
    Kasap H, Akar T, Demirel B, Dursun AZ, Sarı S, Özkök A, et al. The change of preference prioritıies on examinatıon for specialty in medicine by years of high risky medical branches in medical malpractice. The Bulletin of Legal Medicine. 2015;20(1):34-37.
    18
    Chan CY, Sum MY, Lim WS, Chew NW, Samarasekera DD, Sim K. Adoption and correlates of Postgraduate Hospital Educational Environment Measure (PHEEM) in the evaluation of learning environments - a systematic review. Med Teach. 2016;38(12):1248-1255.
    19
    Flaherty GT, Connolly R, O’Brien T. Measurement of the postgraduate educational environment of junior doctors training in medicine at an Irish university teaching hospital. Ir J Med Sci. 2016;185(3):565-571.
    20
    Sarıkaya S, Kadıoğlu A. TÜAK/Türkiye ESRU Asistan El Kitabı. 2. Baskı. İstanbul: Türk Üroloji Derneği; 2017.
    21
    Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon Anabilim Dalı Asistan El Kitabı; 2019-2020. Erişim adresi: http://anestiyoloji.medicine.ankara.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/sites/770/2015/11/Asistan-El-Kitabi-2019-2020.pdf
    22
    Camargo A, Liu L, Yousem DM. Sexual harassment in radiology. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14(8):1094-1099.
    23
    Chrysafi P, Simou E, Makris M, Malietzis G, Makris GC. Bullying and sexual discrimination in the Greek health care system. J Surg Educ. 2017;74(4):690-697.
    24
    Kerr H, Armstrong L, Cade J. Barriers to becoming a female surgeon and the influence of female surgical role models. Postgr Med J. 2016;92(1092):576-580.
    25
    Young-Shumate L, Kramer T, Beresin E. Pregnancy during graduate medical training. Acad Med. 1993;68(10):792-799.
    26
    Garrison CB. The lonely only: physician reflections on race, bias, and residency program leadership. Fam Med. 2019;51(1):59-60.
    27
    Eyigör H, Can İH, İncesulu A, Şenol Y. Women in otolaryngology in Turkey: Insight of gender equality, career development and work-life balance. Am J Otolaryngol. 2020;41(1):102305. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2019.102305
    2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House