This study was designed to determine whether an interactive three-dimensional presentation depicting liver and biliary anatomy is more effective for teaching medical students than a traditional textbook format presentation of the same material. Forty-six medical students volunteered for participation in this study. Baseline demographic information, spatial ability, and knowledge of relevant anatomy were measured. Participants were randomized into two groups and presented with a computer-based interactive learning module comprised of animations and still images to highlight various anatomical structures (3D group), or a computer-based text document containing the same images and text without animation or interactive features (2D group). Following each teaching module, students completed a satisfaction survey and nine-item anatomic knowledge post-test. The 3D group scored higher on the post-test than the 2D group, with a mean score of 74% and 64%, respectively; however, when baseline differences in pretest scores were accounted for, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.33). Spatial ability did not statistically significantly correlate with post-test scores for the 3D group or the 2D group. In the post-test satisfaction survey the 3D group expressed a statistically significantly higher overall satisfaction rating compared to students in the 2D control group (4.5 versus 3.7 out of 5, P = 0.02). While the interactive 3D multimedia module received higher satisfaction ratings from students, it neither enhanced nor inhibited learning of complex hepatobiliary anatomy compared to an informationally equivalent traditional textbook style approach. .
To calculate physicians' fees under Medicare-which in turn influence the physician fee schedules of other public and private payers-one of the essential decisions the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) must make is how much physician time and effort, or work, is associated with various physician services. To make this determination, CMS relies on the recommendations of an advisory committee representing national physician organizations. Some experts on primary care who are concerned about the income gap between primary and specialty care providers have blamed the committee for increasing that gap. Our analysis of CMS's decisions on updating work values between 1994 and 2010 found that CMS agreed with 87.4 percent of the committee's recommendations, although CMS reduced recommended work values for a limited number of radiology and medical specialty services. If policy makers or physicians want to change the update process but keep the Medicare fee schedule in its current form, CMS's capacity to review changes in relative value units could be strengthened through long-term investment in the agency's ability to undertake research and analysis of issues such as how the effort and time associated with different physician services is determined, and which specialties-if any-receive higher payments than others as a result.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.