Procedural Learning Perspectives of Pulmonary Fellows and Practitioners
Procedural learning requires both didactic knowledge and motor skills. Optimal teaching styles and techniques remain to be defined for pulmonary procedural learning. We investigated the preferences of learners at 2 different points in a pulmonary career; as pulmonary fellows and as clinical practitioners.Methods:
A perception survey was conducted among pulmonary fellows and practitioners from multiple institutions throughout the United States. Fellows and practitioners were immediately surveyed on procedural learning factors after completing a procedural learning course using low/high-fidelity and/or cadaver simulators. Survey questions consisting of biographical information and multiple choice, Likert style, and qualitative questions regarding learning preferences were collected.Results:
Seventy-five physicians (44 pulmonary fellows, 31 practitioners) from 35 centers completed the survey. Pulmonary practitioners preferred an academic expert, whereas fellows preferred familiar faculty as lecturers for procedural learning (P=0.03). There were no statistical differences between fellows/practitioners value of the use of simulators, didactics, or handouts. Both groups preferred animal/cadaver and high-fidelity simulators to low-fidelity simulators. Both groups also preferred a traditional course structure to problem-based learning/flipped classroom. The most common answer to barriers for learning a new procedure was “time” for training followed by “opportunities” to learn.Conclusions:
Pulmonary fellows and practitioners we surveyed preferred a traditional course structure with cadaver/animal models and high-fidelity simulation training as compared with a flipped classroom model and low-fidelity simulators, but whether this holds true for the wider population is unknown. Larger studies are needed to validate learning perception with outcomes.