• Hegla Melo Prado, Gilliatt Hannois Falbo, Ana Rodrigues Falbo, and José Natal Figueirôa.
• Instituto de Medicina Integral Professor Fernando Figueira-IMIP, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. heglamelo@imip.org.br, heglamelo@hotmail.com
• Med Educ. 2011 Mar 1; 45 (3): 273-9.

ContextAcademic activity during internship is essentially practical and ward rounds are traditionally considered the cornerstone of clinical education. However, the efficacy and effectiveness of ward rounds for learning purposes have been under-investigated and it is necessary to assess alternative educational paradigms for this activity.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the educational effectiveness of ward rounds conducted with two different learning methodologies.MethodsStudent subjects were first tested on 30 true/false questions to assess their initial degree of knowledge on pneumonia and diarrhoea. Afterwards, they attended ward rounds conducted using an active and a traditional learning methodology. The participants were submitted to a second test 48hours later in order to assess knowledge acquisition and were asked to answer two questions about self-directed learning and their opinions on the two learning methodologies used.ResultsSeventy-two medical students taking part in a paediatric clinic rotation were enrolled. The active methodology proved to be more effective than the traditional methodology for the three outcomes considered: knowledge acquisition (33 students [45.8%] versus 21 students [29.2%]; p=0.03); self-directed learning (38 students [52.8%] versus 11 students [15.3%]; p<0.001), and student opinion on the methods (61 students [84.7%] versus 38 students [52.8%]; p<0.001).ConclusionsThe active methodology produced better results than the traditional methodology in a ward-based context. This study seems to be valuable in terms of the new evidence it demonstrates on learning methodologies in the context of the ward round.© Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2011.

23 keywords...

hide…