Einführung digitaler Lehre im Fach Psychiatrie als Reaktion auf COVID-19: eine vergleichende Evaluation zur Präsenzlehre

Hintergrund: Aufgrund der Corona-Pandemie musste die klassische universitäre Präsenzlehre kurzfristig auf ein digitales Format für das Sommersemester 2020 (SoSe20) umgestellt werden. Am Beispiel der psychiatrischen Klinik der Universitätsmedizin Göttingen sollten der Lernzuwachs und die inhaltliche Bewertung vergleichend zwischen beiden Lehrformen evaluiert werden, um die Qualität der Umstellung beurteilen zu können. Material und Methoden: Insgesamt 350 Studierende beurteilten die von ihnen besuchte Präsenzlehre (WiSe18/19 bis WiSe19/20) bzw. die neu etablierte digitale Lehre (SoSe20) im Rahmen einer standardisierten Lehrevaluation. Sie machten hierbei Angaben zu ihrem persönlichen Lernzuwachs in 7 psychiatrischen Kernbereichen und bewerteten die jeweilige Lehrform inhaltlich auf 8 Dimensionen. Zudem gaben sie ihren durchschnittlichen Zeitaufwand an. Ergebnisse: Die Studierenden schätzten ihren Lernzuwachs in der digitalen Lehre auf allen Dimensionen mindestens gleichwertig zur Präsenzlehre bzw. signifikant besser in den Teilbereichen 'Psychotherapie' sowie 'Schizophrenie' ein. Trotz eines signifikant erhöhten zeitlichen Aufwandes wurde die digitale Lehre auf allen Dimensionen inhaltlich gleichwertig oder besser ('Selbstständiges Aufarbeiten von Lernzielen', 'Format der Vorlesung') eingeschätzt. Bei der Vorbereitung auf die berufliche Praxis zeigten sich die Studierenden bez. der digitalen Lehre skeptisch. Diskussion: Eine kurzfristige pandemiebedingte Umstellung der Präsenzlehre hin zur digitalen Lehre führte in der hier vorliegenden vergleichenden Evaluation nicht zu einem Qualitätsverlust. Mit Blick auf die spätere praktische ärztliche Tätigkeit sollten in zukünftigen Kurrikula neben der klassischen Präsenzlehre auch digitale Lehrangebote ergänzend verankert werden

Community-supported teaching on the topic of transgender identity in undergraduate medical education – a pilot project

Introduction and objectives: Future physicians are insufficiently prepared for the topic of transgender identity during their studies. Relevant courses during undergraduate medical education are heterogeneous and not widely established within the curricula. At our university, we investigated if students' knowledge of transgender identity could be increased through medical specialist teaching and teaching delivered by representatives of the trans* community (community-supported teaching).Methods: During summer semester 2021 (SS21), the knowledge level on transgender identity of 134 medical students in their fifth clinical semester was evaluated (phase 1). In addition, knowledge gain on gender incongruence through the module “psychiatry” was retrospectively surveyed across two dimensions: 1. diagnostic criteria, 2. treatment/care. During winter semester 2021/22 (WS 21/22), a 90-minute seminar on transgender identity was held either community-supported or by medical specialists (phase 2). Following the psychiatry exam, a re-evaluation was carried out by 115 students (phase 3).Results: The students in SS21 did not feel sufficiently educated in the topic of transgender identity through their studies, but rated the relevance of the topic for their later profession as high. Learning gain improved after the introduction of the seminar in WS21/22 compared to the previous semester (both dimensions <.001). Community-supported and specialist teaching achieved equivalent results.Conclusion: One 90-minutes seminar led to a significant learning gain regarding the topic of transgender identity. Community-supported teaching is a promising way to impart knowledge in a qualified manner: Medical faculties should use this form of teaching to convey established knowledge to students in future curricula

Medium-term and peri-lockdown course of psychosocial burden during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study on patients with pre-existing mental disorders

While the COVID-19 pandemic continues, patients with pre-existing mental disorders are increasingly recognized as a risk group for adverse outcomes. However, data are conflicting and cover only short time spans so far. Here, we investigate the medium-term and peri-lockdown-related changes of mental health outcomes in such patients in a longitudinal study. A cohort of 159 patients comprising all major mental disorders (ICD-10 F0-F9) were interviewed twice with the Goettingen psychosocial Burden and Symptom Inventory (Goe-BSI) to evaluate psychosocial burden, psychiatric symptoms and resilience at the end of the first (April/May 2020) and the second lockdown in Germany (November/December 2020). For the primary outcome "psychosocial burden" ratings also comprised retrospective pre-pandemic (early 2020) and very early states during the pandemic (March 2020). For all diagnostic groups, psychosocial burden varied significantly over time (p &lt; 0.001) with an increase from the pre-pandemic to the initial phase (p &lt; 0.001), followed by a steady decrease across both lockdowns, normalizing in November/December 2020. Female gender, high adjustment disorder symptom load at baseline and psychiatric comorbidities were risk factors for higher levels and an unfavorable course of psychosocial burden. Most psychiatric symptoms changed minimally, while resilience decreased over time (p = 0.044 and p = 0.037). The longitudinal course of psychosocial burden indicates an initial stress response, followed by a return to pre-pandemic levels even under recurrent lockdown conditions, mimicking symptoms of an adjustment disorder. Strategies for proactive, specific and continuous treatment have to address resilience capacities before their depletion in the pandemic aftermath, especially for patients with additional risk factors