1. Teaching Medical Students Oral Presentations Skills
Kathryn Fisher, M.D., M.S., Catherine Reynolds, M.D., Mandy Hill, Dr.P.H, M.P.H., Misha Granado, M.S., M.P.H., and Michael Van Meter, M.D., M.S.
CLICK TO GO BACK TO KIOSK MENU
Department of Emergency Medicine, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Conclusion
Our pilot study data supports the need for instruction for EM-bound medical students on EM-specific oral presentations
There was no difference in sense of preparedness for students who had prior training in EM-focused presentations, suggesting that current methods are ineffective
After implementation of a didactic curriculum, students felt significantly more prepared to give patient presentations in the emergency department
There was no statistically significant difference in effectiveness between each of the components of the didactic curriculum, suggesting that a multimodal approach may be most effective
Background
Medical students often receive generalized training in oral presentations, but lack preparation for Emergency Medicine (EM)-specific presentations
Formatting of EM presentations differs in length, focus, and structure from standard presentations
Previous research suggests that students require further instruction on EM-focused oral presentations
We hypothesize that a multi-modal approach will be most effective
To assess the need for further research and additional training of EM-bound medical students in EM-specific oral presentations, and to evaluate the efficacy of components of a didactic, multimodal curriculum
Objective
Material & Methods
Fourth-year EM-bound students (home and away rotators) were voluntarily enrolled
Students (n=13) anonymously completed a pre-instruction survey on prior training in oral presentations and sense of preparation for EM-focused oral presentations
Students then completed a self-paced, multimodal curriculum from existing sources
At the end of the rotation, students filled out unmatched surveys to rate their sense of preparedness and the effectiveness of each component of the curriculum
Data were analyzed using t-test for statistical significance for preparedness and ANOVA for curriculum components
77% of students had previous education in oral presentations, however less than half (31%) reported receiving EM-specific training
On pre-intervention surveys, students had an average of 5.92/10 when asked how prepared they felt presenting in an EM format, regardless of whether or not they had received prior EM-specific oral presentation preparation (p=0.90)
Students surveyed after curriculum completion felt significantly more prepared presenting an EM case, with an average of 8.18/10 (p<.05)
There was no significant difference in the effectiveness between each of the components of the curriculum (F(4,48) = 0.16, p= 0.96)
Results
Description of Methods
Description of Stats? Or next page?

2. Multimodal Curriculum
Background
Previous Research
Multimodal Curriculum
Primary literature
Supplemental outline from primary literature
Video with examples
Podcast
Podcast notes
In 2015, Duong et al found that 78% of medical students in their study felt that learning to present an emergency medicine oral case presentation requires additional instruction beyond the existing medical school curriculum
However, only 37% of surveyed students reported getting EM-specific instruction on oral presentations while in medical school.
In 2012, Heiman et al. used a model based on e-learning and deliberate practice to teach oral presentation skills to second-year medical students.
Heiman et al. found that on-line learning combined with coached, deliberate practice improves students’ clinical reasoning, organization, and length of presentation. Additionally, this strategy gave the students a standard model to follow when presenting
References:
1. Carroll, Steve. “How to give a good ED presentation” EMBasic podcast notes
2.    Duong, David K., Leslie C. Oyama, Jessica L. Smith, Aneesh T. Narang, and Jordan Spector. "Medical Student Perceptions on the Instruction of the Emergency Medicine Oral Case Presentation." The Journal of Emergency Medicine 48.3 (2015):
3.    Davenport, Chip, Benjamin Honigman, and Jeff Druck. "The 3-Minute Emergency Medicine Medical Student Presentation: A Variation on a Theme." Academic Emergency Medicine15.7 (2008):
4.    Heiman, Heather L., Toshiko Uchida, Craig Adams, John Butter, Elaine Cohen, Stephen D. Persell, Paul Pribaz, William C. Mcgaghie, and Gary J. Martin. "E-learning and Deliberate Practice for Oral Case Presentation Skills: A Randomized Trial." Medical Teacher (2012): n. pag
5.    Patient Presentations EMRA Education Committee/CDEM. (

3. Materials and Methods Experimental Design Pre-Survey
Material & Methods
Fourth-year EM-bound students (home and away rotators) were voluntarily enrolled.
Students (n=13) anonymously completed a pre-instruction survey on prior training for oral presentations and feelings of preparedness for EM-focused oral presentations
Students then completed a self-paced, multimodal curriculum from existing sources
At the end of the rotation students filled out unmatched surveys to rate their sense of preparedness and the effectiveness of each component of the curriculum
Experimental Design
Pre-Survey
Didactic Curriculum
Post-Survey
Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed using a two-sample t-test assuming unequal variances for statistical significance for comparing average feelings of preparedness pre- and post-intervention
ANOVA was used to analyze effectiveness of curriculum components

4. Results
77% of students had previous education in oral presentations, however less than half (31%) reported receiving EM-specific training
On pre-intervention surveys, students had an average of 5.92/10 when asked how prepared they felt presenting in an EM format, regardless of whether or not they had received prior EM-specific oral presentation preparation (p=0.90)
Students surveyed after curriculum completion felt significantly more prepared presenting an EM case, with an average of 8.18/10 (p<.05)
There was no significant difference in the effectiveness between each of the components of the curriculum (F(4,48) = 0.16, p= 0.96)
Results
Figure 2 (below): Average feelings of preparedness for EM-focused oral presentations pre- and post-intervention
Figure 3 (Right): Effectiveness of each curriculum component of a multimodal didactic curriculum

5. Conclusions, Limitations and Future Directions Pilot study conclusions
Our pilot study data supports the need for further and more standardized instruction for EM-bound medical students on EM-formatted oral presentations
After implementation of a didactic curriculum, students felt significantly more prepared to give patient presentations in the ED
There was no statistically significant difference in effectiveness between each of the components of the didactic curriculum, suggesting that a multimodal approach may be most effective
1. Pilot Feasibility Study (complete)
2. Validation of oral presentations rubric (In-progress)
3. Full study with didactic curriculum, rubric to grade students on shift
Study Limitations
2 students were lost to follow-up: 1 did not complete the rotation, 1 did not complete a post-survey
Student completion of didactic curriculum was on the “honor system”