2017—2019年同院不同职称临床医师带教工作量化评估的结果分析  

Analysis on the quantitative evaluation results of teaching work of clinicians with different professional titles in a hospital from 2017 to 2019

作　　者：方丹嫔 张鸿[1] 张文喜[1] Fang Danpin;Zhang Hong;Zhang Wenxi(Teaching office,Taizhou First People's Hospital,Taizhou 318020,Zhejiang,China)

机构地区：[1]台州市第一人民医院教育处,浙江台州318020

出　　处：《中国毕业后医学教育》2021年第3期202-206,共5页Chinese Journal of Graduate Medical Education

基　　金：温州医科大学2019年度高等医学教育教学改革研究课题(YBJG2019056)。

摘　　要：目的探讨临床医师带教工作情况及影响因素,指导医院临床师资管理。方法对2017—2019年台州市第一人民医院临床医师带教工作进行量化评估,含带教工作量、教学成果、教学管理、教学会议、师资培训5项指标,获取量化评估结果,对比不同年份、不同职称得分分布情况。结果2017年130人次总体均分10.900(4.675~22.675),2018年173人次总体均分16.400(7.500~25.000),2019年294人次总体均分12.500(4.500~22.228),3年总体均分对比差异有统计学意义。不同职称对比显示,3年总体评价差异有统计学意义。工作量比较中,3年三组差异均有统计学意义,其中2018年及2019年副主任医师工作量评价最高。教学管理比较中,2018年及2019年三组差异均有统计学意义,副主任医师、主任医师评价较高。2019年5项指标三组差异均有统计学意义,除前述工作量和教学管理方面外,在教学会议参与、师资培训、教学成果等方面,副主任医师评价均为最高。结论带教工作开展客观量化评估,结果与职称晋升等挂钩有助于激励临床医师带教的积极性。副主任医师是带教工作主力军。Objective To explore the teaching status of clinicians and its influencing factors,and to guide the management of clinical teachers in hospitals.Methods The quantitative evaluation of clinicians'teaching work in Taizhou First People's Hospital from 2017 to 2019 was carried out.The quantitative evaluation results were obtained by integrating five indicators of workload,teaching results,teaching management,teaching conferences and teacher training.The score distribution of different years and different professional titles were compared,and the results were statistically analyzed.Results The total average score of 130 cases in 2017 was 10.900(4.675~22.675),of 173 cases in 2018 was 16.400(7.500~25.000),and of 294 cases in 2019 was 12.500(4.500~22.228).The difference was statistically significant.The comparison of different titles showed that the general evaluated difference of 3 years was statistically significant,and the workload of deputy chief physicians in 2018 and 2019 was the highest.There were significant differences in 2018 and 2019 within the three groups,the associate chief physicians and chief physicians had higher evaluations compared with teaching management.There were significant differences between the three groups in the five indicators in 2019,comparison of the 5 indicators between the 3 groups in 2019 showed significant differences.The evaluation scores of deputy chief physicians in teaching meetings,teacher training and teaching achievements were the highest except in workload and teaching management.Conclusion Carrying out objective quantitative evaluation of teaching work and link the results with the promotion of professional titles is helpful to stimulate the enthusiasm of clinicians in teaching.The deputy chief physicians are the main force of teaching work.

关 键 词：临床医师 带教 量化评估 结果 分析 

分 类 号：G420[文化科学—课程与教学论]