Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-25T06:50:20.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Psychiatry Pitstop – Can an Established Face-to-Face Communication Skills Teaching Programme Be Delivered Online?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Anna Kathryn Taylor*
Affiliation:
Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
Indeera Shankla
Affiliation:
Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom
Debbie-Faith Ebeye
Affiliation:
Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom
Alex Graham
Affiliation:
Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

Psychiatry Pitstop is a communication skills teaching programme for fourth year medical students that is led and run voluntarily by trainee psychiatrists. Initially, the format was a 6-week course after working hours, with each week covering a different topic and three simulated patient scenarios using professional actors. Since 2020, this programme has been run online. Aims: 1. To use pre and post-course questionnaires to study whether online delivery is comparable to face-to-face. 2. To gain qualitative and quantitative data from students to assess advantages and disadvantages of online delivery.

Methods

Pre- and post-course questionnaires using Likert scales have been used since the Programme's 2015 inception. Additional questions asked about medical students’ views on the online delivery. Pre- and post-course questionnaires were analysed using Chi-squared to determine whether there had been a subjective improvement in communication skills, and online courses were compared to face-to-face.

Results

17.9% students agreed with “My communication skills in psychiatry are good” before the face-to-face course, compared with 81.32% of medical students afterwards (p < .01). 26.47% agreed before the online course, compared with 80.95% afterwards (p < .01).

22.7% students agreed with “Talking to patients about mental illness makes me uncomfortable” before the face-to-face course, compared with 6.87% afterwards (p < .01). 11.77% agreed before the online course, compared with 14.29% of students afterwards (p = .785).

51.55% students disagreed with “I do not know how to ask about symptoms of mental illness” before the face-to-face course compared with 91.2% afterwards (p < .01). 47.05% disagreed before the online course compared with 80.95% of students afterwards (p < .01).

Students enjoyed online delivery, feeling it was realistic and reflected current consultations. Online delivery also made sessions more accessible and time-efficient. However, students reported that they would prefer at least one session to be face-to-face.

Conclusion

The study shows that online delivery of Psychiatry Pitstop leads to a similar improvement in medical students’ subjective assessment of and confidence in their communication skills, and an increased knowledge of questions to ask in a psychiatric history. The face-to-face sessions have been shown to reduce the level of discomfort experienced by medical students when talking to patients with mental illness. This improvement was not replicated with the online delivery of teaching, but as this result was not statistically significant, further data should be obtained.

Students value being able to engage in additional communication skills training and future Pitstops should consider trialling a hybrid model.

Type
Education and Training
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.