目的 研究3D打印技术辅助教学方式在本科骨科学教学中提高布鲁姆认知领域教育目标层次的效果。方法 选取陆军军医大学2014级五年制临床医学专业24名学生为研究对象,将其随机分为试验组和对照组,每组12名学生。选定股骨粗隆间骨折作为教学内容,由同一位教师授课,试验组学生采用案例教学方法和3D打印技术辅助教学方式,对照组学生仅采用案例教学方法。教学结束后,比较分析两组学生课堂提出问题和方案的人数、理论测试成绩,对其教学效果做出评价。结果 在课堂提出有效问题和有效治疗方案的人数方面,试验组学生均多于对照组学生,其差异均具有统计学意义(χ2=4.196, χ2=4.444,均P<0.05);在课堂提出创意方案的人数方面,两组学生的差异无统计学意义(χ2=2.182,P>0.05)。在理论测试成绩方面,试验组学生中获得优秀成绩的人数多于对照组学生,其差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.815,P>0.05)。结论 3D打印技术辅助教学方式在本科骨科学教学中对于提高布鲁姆认知领域教育目标层次具有一定效果,但从初级目标层次上升到高级目标层次中的作用并不全面和充分。
Objective To evaluate 3D printing technology-assisted teaching method in improving the orthopedic teaching based on Bloom's teaching goal. Methods A total of 24 medical students in grade 2014 at Army Medical University were randomly divided into experimental group and control group with 12 students in each. The same teacher gives same lecture of femoral intertrochanter fracture for the two groups, but experimental group had the lecture with the assistant of 3D printing femoral intertrochanter fracture model, and control group committed no such aide. After class, paper test were carried out, score and the number of multi-level questions, which students had in or after class were collected and analyzed with SPSS 12.0. Results The number of good question or wonderful treatment suggestion shows significant difference between the experimental group and control group (χ2=4.196, χ2=4.444, all P<0.05), with the former superior to the later, respectively; the results shows no significant between two groups in the number of innovative idea (χ2=2.182, P>0.05); the excellent score of theory examination shows no significant difference between the two groups (χ2=1.815, P>0.05), in spite of the fact the number of student with excellent score in experimental group was more than that in control group. Conclusions The 3D printing technology-assisted teaching method is helpful for the orthopedic teaching based on Bloom's teaching goal, but it is not significant to boost primary level to advanced level.
[1] Scawn RL, Foster A, Lee BW, et al. Customised 3D printing: an innovative training tool for the next generation of orbital surgeons[J]. Orbit,2015, 34(4):216-219.DOI:10.3109/01676830.2015.1049367.
[2] Arantes M, Arantes J, Ferreira MA. Tools and resources for neuroanatomy education: a systematic review[J].BMC Medical Education,2018,18(1): 94-97.DOI:10.1186/s12909-018-1210-6.
[3] Hopkins R, Bowen J, Campbell K, et al. Effects of study design and trends for EVAR versus OSR[J].Vasc Health Risk Manag,2008,4(5):1011-1022.DOI: 10.2147/vhrm.S3810.
[4] Costello JP, Wilson JK, Louis C, et al. Surgical cardiac denervation therapy for treatment of congenital ion channelopathies in pediatric patients: a contemporary, single institutional experience[J].World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg,2015,6(1):33-38.DOI:10.1177/215013511455 5203.
[5] Jones DB, Sung R, Weinberg C, et al. Three-dimensional modeling may improve surgical education and clinical practice[J]. Surg Innov,2016, 23(2):189-195.DOI: 10.1177/1553350615607641.
[6] Lim KH, Loo ZY, Goldie SJ, et al. Use of 3D printed models in medical education: a randomized control trial comparing 3D prints versus cadaveric materials for learning external cardiac anatomy[J].Anat Sci Educ,2016,9(3):213-221.DOI:10.1002/ase.1573.
[7] Ford S, Minshall T. Invited review article: where and how 3D printing is used in teaching and education[J]. Additive Manufacturing,2019,25: 131-150.DOI:10.1016/j.addma.2018.10.028.
[8] 韩冠生,朱勋兵,韩俊柱,等.PBL教学法结合3D打印技术在骨科临床实习带教中的应用价值[J].齐齐哈尔医学院学报,2018,39(8):954-956.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-1256.2018.08.038.
