P082 Virtual undergraduate rheumatology teaching: a viable alternative approach during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Authors: Jiju Prince , Boyce Katy , Nadesalingam Kavitha 
Published: April 2021

Background/Aims 

The fifth year undergraduate curriculum at the University of Leeds (UoL) usually involves 6x4 weekly rotations including a placement in musculoskeletal medicine. With the COVID-19 pandemic, Bradford Teaching Hospitals Foundation Trust (BTHFT) redesigned the delivery of the rheumatology curriculum to facilitate remote learning due to the high-risk patients under rheumatology, potential consultant re-deployment and cross site working. Other trusts linked to UoL planned to deliver their teaching in the traditional method. We aimed to deliver the rheumatology undergraduate curriculum remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods 

Students rotating through BTHFT were changed to an 8-week placement. They were scheduled shifts (days, twilights and nights) minimising the number of students on a ward at any one time to assist with social distancing. Rheumatology at BTHFT does not have a dedicated ward and students were assigned to a general medical or surgical ward. The rheumatology department were asked to deliver rheumatology teaching remotely using Webex to all BTHFT students (rather than the 8 students that traditionally would be on placement). The curriculum was reviewed, and 8x weekly sessions were delivered by the consultant team to cover the curriculum as designed by the UoL. Additional sessions were delivered by Specialist registrars and Specialist nurse. Small group face-to-face teaching sessions to check competence with examination techniques were scheduled. Preliminary feedback was collected after each teaching session through the use of an anonymous online survey tool, as well as an email request for additional feedback.

Results 

The rheumatology teaching was well-received by students. There were several aspects of the virtual teaching that students appreciated, such as encouragement of student participation. The interactive element prioritised in the sessions was highlighted by the students as enhancing their learning and making rheumatology an engaging subject. The majority of students reported their learning needs were being met, with the pervading feeling that the curriculum was being delivered adequately. It is not possible to fully substitute face-to-face learning with virtual teaching with regard to history-taking and clinical examination. Some students highlighted this potential gap in their experience. However, efforts to recreate these opportunities were made via the use of a live video patient consultation facilitated by a consultant. This was reported by students as being extremely helpful in their learning. Additionally, the use of slide show quizzes presenting rheumatological pathologies was identified as improving knowledge of clinical findings on examination. The main challenges revolved around technical issues and timetabling clashes.

Conclusion 

Our study has revealed that virtual rheumatology teaching sessions at BTHFT have shown promising results for future delivery of learning objectives. Students have been satisfied that their learning needs are being met, and have enjoyed the interactivity of sessions. The main reported barrier to learning involved technical issues.

Disclosure 

P. Jiju: None. K. Boyce: None. K. Nadesalingam: None.