https://www.ijmhr.org/ijar.htm editor_anatomy@ijmhr.org
ISSN:       2321-4281 (E) 2321-8967 (P)

IJAR.2016.483

DOWNLOAD PDF
Table of Contents

Type of Article:  Original Research

Volume 5; Issue 1 (January 2017)

Page No.: 3379-3383

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2016.483

THE RELEVANCE OF THE PRECLINICAL CURRICULUM DURING CLINICAL PRACTICE: INTERNS’ PERSPECTIVE IN A GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE

Seema Deepak *1, K.R. Dakshayani 2, Manjunatha S.N 3.

*1 Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, M.M.C & R.I, Mysore, Karnataka, India.

2 Professor & Head, Department of Anatomy, M.M.C & R.I, Mysore, Karnataka, India.

3 Associate Professor, Department of P & S M, M.M.C & R.I, Mysore, Karnataka, India.

Correspondence address: Dr Seema Deepak, Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, M.C & R.I, Mysore- 570001. Karnataka, India. Ph: 9844616603 E-Mail: seemadeepakmysore@gmail.com

ABSTRACT:

Background, context and the purpose of the study: Majority of the Indian medical colleges are following conventional discipline based curriculum with least interdisciplinary integration. Medical educators are of the opinion that lack of integration in the traditional curriculum has resulted in poor learning outcomes and students perceive the basic science subjects as irrelevant during their clinical practice.  The present study was undertaken to explore interns’ perception about the relevance of preclinical curriculum during clinical practice.

Objectives: To analyze interns’ perception about the relevance of preclinical subjects and practical training during clinical practice.

Materials and Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted at Mysore Medical College and Research Institute, Mysore using a pre validated, predesigned questionnaire containing 37 items administered to 50 interns. Descriptive statistics was applied and the results are presented as percentages.

Results: 70% of our students perceive preclinical subjects provide basic foundation for clinical skills / procedures. 46% feel that the curriculum lacks clinical relevance. 90% had to refer basic science subjects during their later years. 54% felt the need for clinical exposure in the first professional year. With regard to the practical training, the students are of the opinion that the basic clinical examination skills that were taught were very helpful. Further the students prefer to interpret the results than to perform some of the practical exercise that requires technical skills.

Conclusion: The study revealed the positive perception of students towards preclinical subjects and the areas for improvement.

Key words: Preclinical Curriculum, Medical Students, Perceptions.

REFERENCES:

  1. Chandramohan P. Medical education in India at cross roads: Issues and solutions. Arch Med Health Sci 2013;1:80-84.
  2. Sood R, Adkoli BV. Medical education in India – Problems and prospects. Journal of Indian Academy of Clinical medicine 2000;1(3):210-212.
  3. Khalid BA. The current status of medical education in the Gulf co-operation Council Countries. Ann Saudi Med 2008;28(2):83-88.
  4. D’Éon MF. Knowledge loss of medical students on first year basic science courses at the University of Saskatchewan. BMC 2006;6:5.
  5. Srinivasa DK. Curriculum Planning in Medical Education: Principles and practice. Edited by Srinivasa DK 1995;165-171.
  6. Chawla O, Bhattacharjee M, Kansal NK. Students’ perspective of the MBBS Physiology curriculum. South East Asian journal of medical education 2012;6(2):29-33.
  7. Gupta S, Gupta AK, Verma M, Kaur H, Kaur A, Singh K. The attitudes and perceptions of medical students towards basic science subjects during their clinical years: A cross sectional survey. Int J App Basic Med Res 2014;4:16-19.
  8. Artino AR, Jeffrey S, Rochelle LA, Kent JD, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE guide No 87. Medical Teacher 2014;36:463-474.
  9. Atukorala KR, Atapattu P. Preclinical – Basic sciences teaching curriculum of a medical school in a developing country- are we doing it right? J Bangladesh Soc Physiology 2014; Dec 9(2):98 – 104.
  10. MCI Vision 2015. Available from: [http://www.mciindia.org/tools/announcement/MCI_booklet.pdf]
  11. Dahle LO, Brynhildsen J, Behrbohm Fallsberg M, Rundquist I, Hammar M. Pros & cons of vertical integration between clinical medicine and basic science within a problem based undergraduate medical curriculum: examples and experiences from Linkoping, Sweden. Med Teach 2002;24:280-285.
  12. Dasseau J, Knutson D, Way D. Anatomy correlations: introducing clinical skills to improve performance in anatomy. Fam Med 2008;40(9):633-637.
  13. Woods NN, Neville AJ, Levinson AJ, Howey EH, Oczkowski WJ, Norman GR.The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis. Acad Med 2006;81(Suppl 10):S124-127.
  14. Vyas R, Jacob M, Faith M, Isaac B, Rabi S, Sathishkumar S, Selvakumar D, Ganesh  An effective integrated learning program in the first year of medical course. The National medical journal of India 2008;21(1)21-26.
  15. Bhattacharya N, Shankar N, Khaliq N, Rajesh CS, Tandon OP. Introducing problem based learning in physiology in the conventional Indian medical curriculum. Nat Med J India 2005;18:92-95.
  16. Srimathi T. A study on students’ feedback on the foundation course in the first year MBBS curriculum. International journal of medical research & health sciences 2014;3(3): 575-579.
  17. Singh S, Ghosh S, Himanshu P. Foundation course for MBBS students at entry level: Experience at an Indian medical school. South East Asian Journal of medical education. Inaugural issue;33-37.

Cite this article: Seema Deepak, K.R. Dakshayani, Manjunatha S.N. THE RELEVANCE OF THE PRECLINICAL CURRICULUM DURING CLINICAL PRACTICE: INTERNS’ PERSPECTIVE IN A GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE. Int J Anat Res 2017;5(1):3379-3383. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2016.483