An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Medical School Musculoskeletal Curriculum at an Academic Medical Center
Background: Musculoskeletal disorders are common medical problems encountered by physicians and affected 126.6 million Americans in 2012. Musculoskeletal education has inadequate in United States medical schools.
Objective: To determine the musculoskeletal competency of third year medical students.
Methods: A cross-sectional 25-question nationally validated musculoskeletal competency exam was given to the third year medical students. A survey was given to second and third year medical students to assess students’ level of interest in musculoskeletal medicine and their feedback regarding the curriculum.
Results: The mean score of the competency exam was 69.0%. There was 48/107 (44.9%) students’ who reached the minimum passing score of 70%. Free-response feedback from both classes featured themes of more hands-on learning, a longer clinical block, and more small-group learning sessions.
Conclusions: Third year medical students scored relatively well on the exam. Student feedback suggests the 2-week musculoskeletal block is useful and relevant to their future careers.
Copyright (c) 2018 Ryan Caldwell, Andrew Black, Andy Lalka, Frank A Scott
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with HLRC agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and publishing rights without restrictions and grant the journal right of first publication. Authors grant Laureate Education, Inc. a license to publish and distribute the work under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in HLRC.
- Authors who submit manuscripts are to declare that their submission to HLRC is not simultaneously under consideration for publication in another journal and has not been published elsewhere previously.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the HLRC's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in HLRC.
- Pre-refereeing and pre-publication: To ensure consistency in the information available to researchers and to safeguard the blind peer-review process, authors are asked to abstain from self-archiving or posting online the submitted manuscript before the review process is complete.
- Post-refereeing and post-publication: Authors are free to self-archive and distribute the peer-reviewed and editorially reviewed version of their work. As a full open access journal, there is no embargo period. Authors are encouraged to archive the published PDF version, which includes a suggested citation with all pertinent information, including a digital object identifier (DOI). If the author decides to self-archive or distribute the work in a format other than the published PDF, the author must include the assigned DOI and acknowledge the work was first published in HLRC.