Undergraduate musculoskeletal examination teaching by trained patient educators—a comparison with doctor-led teaching
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the core hand and knee examination skills gained by undergraduates taught either by trained patient educators (PEs) or by doctors. METHODS: A total of 50 final year medical students were randomized to receive training from PEs or doctors. Group A were taught hand examination by a PE with rheumatoid arthritis, and knee examination by a PE with osteoarthritis. Group B was taught hand and knee examination by a consultant rheumatologist plus an untrained patient with appropriate signs. All students were taught an established core skills set in small group workshops. Students then undertook two validated objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) stations with two blinded assessors. Pre- and post-teaching questionnaires established the students' self-reported levels of skills (SRS) and a student evaluation of teaching (SET). The study was analysed as an equivalence trial. A mean difference in OSCE scores of 10% was assumed to be of educational significance. RESULTS: Although the SET scores of both groups were high, the doctor-led group received higher scores. Aside from this, the two student groups did not differ significantly. There were no significant differences in mean hand OSCE (mean difference = 0.88, P = 0.28, 95% CI = -0.73 to 2.49) or knee OSCE (mean difference = 0.28, P = 0.7, 95% CI = -1.19 to 1.75) scores. Both the upper and lower confidence intervals for each mean difference fell within the 10% range (-2.8 to 2.8 for the hand, and -2.5 to 2.5 for the knee) and equivalence was assumed. CONCLUSIONS: Adequately trained PEs can deliver clearly structured undergraduate skills, teaching with equivalent learning outcomes to those of rheumatology consultants. PEs are a valuable development to augment musculoskeletal education in the face of expanding student numbers.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
While patients and medical educators in the study by Raj et al praised patients' assessments, students expressed their concerns whether patients could reliably assess clinical skills or whether they were likely to be too lenient.
“While patients and medical educators in the study by Raj et al54 praised patients’ assessments, students expressed their concerns whether patients could reliably assess clinical skills or whether they were likely to be too lenient.54”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
Students were concerned that patients might have difficulty discriminating between poor and good performance, and are likely to be too lenient in feedback or assessment.
“Students were also concerned that patients might have difficulty discriminating between poor and good performance, and are likely to be too lenient in feedback or assessment.54”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
That article did not provide an economic evaluation.
“but did not provide an economic evaluation.54”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
Only one article commented on cost-effectiveness of patient involvement.
“Only one article commented on cost-effectiveness, noting that patient-led teaching is a cost-effective method compared with physician-led teaching, but did not provide an economic evaluation.54”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
Reported financial cost of £800 for a physical examination training.
“£800 for a physical examination training54”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
Ten studies offered participating patients remuneration through honoraria between €8 per hour and £350 per day or an unspecified amount.
“Ten studies offered participating patients remuneration through honoraria between €8 per hour and £350 per day43 53 54 or an unspecified amount.28 35 39 48 50 57”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
That article noted that patient-led teaching is a cost-effective method compared with physician-led teaching.
“noting that patient-led teaching is a cost-effective method compared with physician-led teaching”
From Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [54]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 31 · Cited by 53
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Dequeker J, Rasker JJ, Woolf AD. Educational issues in rheumatol- ogy. Ballieres Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2000;14:715-29.
- Branch VK, Graves G, Hanczyc M et al. The utility of trained arthritis patient educators in the evaluation and improvement of musculoskeletal examination skills of physicians in training. Arthritis Care & Research 1999;12:61-9.
- Gruppen LD, Branch VK, Laing TJ. The use of trained patient educators with rheumatoid arthritis to teach medical students. Arthrit Care Res 1996;9:302-8.
- Linblad S. Student teaching of EULAR standard joint examination techniques by patient partners is superior to teaching tutored by rheumatologists only -a controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 1998;41:S340.
- Johnson RK. Readability. School Science Review 1979;212:562-8.
- Raj N. Trained Patient educators in musculoskeletal medicine: a comparison with doctor led teaching. M.D. Thesis, University of Nottingham, 2006.
- Authors
- Raj, N., Badcock, L. J., Brown, G. A., Deighton, C. M., & O'Reilly, S. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Raj, N.
- Venue
- Rheumatology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-04-13
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1404-1408
- ISSN
- 1462-0324 (ISSN-L)
- 1462-0332
- OpenAlex
- W2115474268
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 3.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Lara D. Veeken (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
- Keywords
- patient educators, musculoskeletal examination, hand examination, knee examination, rheumatology education, OSCE, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, equivalence trials
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Consultants, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Patients, Physical Examination, Rheumatology, Teaching, Single-Blind Method, Osteoarthritis, Knee
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review