Tıp eğitiminde temel ve klinik bilimlerin sıkı entegrasyonu için temel bilimler esas olarak klinisyenler tarafından öğretilmelidir.

Bugün tıp eğitimi birçok sorunla karşı karşıyadır. Fakat en ağır sorun temel ve klinik bilimlerin entegre edilememesidir. Bu nedenle öğrenciler temel bilimlerden soğumuş, klinisyenler ise bilimi temel bilimcilere bırakmıştır. Klinik öncesi dönemde öğrenilen temel bilimler öğrenciler tarafından unutulmakta, klinik bilgiyle bağdaştırılamamaktadır. Çünkü klinik bilgi olmadan öğrenilen bir temel bilim bilgisi öğrenci için nasıl kullanacağını bilmediği düşük değerli bir bilgidir. Bu yüzden tıp eğitimi müfredatındaki her reform temel bilimlere takılıp kalmaktadır. Artık cesur adımlar atmanın zamanı gelmiştir. Birinci adım tıp eğitiminden klinik öncesi dönemin çıkarılması olmalıdır. Tıp eğitimi tamamen klinik eğitim döneminden oluşmalıdır. Bu durum klinik eğitim için öğrenciye ve klinisyen öğreticiye çok daha fazla zaman kazandıracaktır. İkinci adım temel bilim eğitiminin temel bilimcilerden alınıp klinisyenlerin sorumluluğuna verilmesi olmalıdır. Bir temel bilim bilgisinin ne kadarının hangi şekilde klinikle ilişkili olduğuna bir temel bilimci değil ancak klinisyen karar verebilir. Temel bilimlerin klinik eğitimin bir bileşeni olarak klinisyen tarafından derslik, hasta başı ve diğer klinik uygulamalar sırasında öğrenciye özümsetilmesi en doğrusudur. Böylece öğrenciler temel bilimleri özümsemiş ve temel bilimleri klinik durumla entegre etmiş akademik klinisyenler olarak yetişecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

tıp eğitimi, müfredat, klinik stajlar, entegrasyon, temel bilimler

Basic medical sciences should be mainly taught by clinicians for a tight integration of basic and clinical sciences in medical education.

Today, medical education faces many problems. However, the most serious problem is the inability to integrate basic and clinical sciences. For this reason, students alienate from basic sciences, and clinicians are leaving sciences to basic scientists every day. Basic medical sciences learned in the preclinical term are remembered less by students and cannot be sufficiently associated with clinical reality. This is because basic scientific knowledge learned without a clinical framework is low-value data that the student does not know how to use. Therefore, all reform initiatives in the medical education curriculum stick to the obstacle of basic sciences. Now is the time to take bold steps. The first step should be to remove the preclinical term from medical education. Medical education should only consist of clinical education terms. This will gain the student and clinician a lot more time for clinical training. The second step should be to take basic sciences education from basic scientists and place it under the responsibility of clinicians. Clinicians can decide much better how much of basic science knowledge is clinically relevant. As a component of clinical education, it is best for students to internalize the basic sciences during classes, at the bedside, and in other clinical practices under the clinician's authority. Thus, students may be graduated as academic clinicians who have internalized the basic sciences and integrated the basic sciences with clinical reality.

Keywords:

medical education, curriculum, clinical apprenticeship, integration, basic medical sciences,

PDF

___

1. Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. The lancet. 2010;376(9756):1923–1958. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5.
2. Cooke M, Irby DM, Sullivan W, Ludmerer KM. American medical education 100 years after the Flexner report. New England journal of medicine. 2006;355(13):1339–1344. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra055445.
3. Prober CG, Khan S. Medical education reimagined: a call to action. Academic Medicine. 2013;88(10):1407–1410. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a368bd.
4. Hopkins R, Pratt D, Bowen JL, Regehr G. Integrating basic science without integrating basic scientists: reconsidering the place of individual teachers in curriculum reform. Academic Medicine. 2015;90(2):149–153. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000437.
5. Finnerty EP, Chauvin S, Bonaminio G, Andrews M, Carroll RG, Pangaro LN. Flexner revisited: the role and value of the basic sciences in medical education. Academic Medicine. 2010;85(2):349–355. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c88b09.
6. Spencer AL, Brosenitsch T, Levine AS, Kanter SL. Back to the basic sciences: an innovative approach to teaching senior medical students how best to integrate basic science and clinical medicine. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2008;83(7):662–669. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e318178356b
7. Brass EP. Basic biomedical sciences and the future of medical education: implications for internal medicine. Journal of general internal medicine. 2009;24(11):1251–1254. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-0998-5.
8. Filewod NC, Batt J, Kapus A, Szaszi K, Fairn GD, Slutsky AS, et al. Should basic science matter to clinicians? The Lancet. 2018;391(10119):410–412. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30199-5.
9. Davis D, O’Brien MAT, Freemantle N, Wolf FM, Mazmanian P, Taylor-Vaisey A. Impact of formal continuing medical education: do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes? Jama. 1999;282(9):867–874. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.9.867.
10. Nara N, Suzuki T, Tohda S. The current medical education system in the world. Journal of Medical and Dental Sciences. 2011;58(2):79–83. PMID: 23896789
11. Emanuel EJ. The inevitable reimagining of medical education. Jama. 2020;323(12):1127–1128. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.1227.
12. D’Eon MF. Knowledge loss of medical students on first year basic science courses at the University of Saskatchewan. BMC medical education. 2006;6(1):1–6. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-6-5.
13. Prober CG, Heath C. Lecture halls without lectures—a proposal for medical education. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(18):1657–1659. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1202451.
14. Densen P. Challenges and opportunities facing medical education. Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association. 2011;122:48. PMID: 21686208
15. Ganguly P, Yaqinuddin A, Al-Kattan W, Kemahli S, AlKattan K. Medical education dilemma: How can we best accommodate basic sciences in a curriculum for 21st century medical students? Canadian journal of physiology and pharmacology. 2019;97(4):293–296. doi: 10.1139/cjpp-2018-0428.
16. Peters M, Ten Cate O. Bedside teaching in medical education: a literature review. Perspectives on medical education. 2014;3(2):76–88. doi: 10.1007/s40037-013-0083-y.
17. Guraya SY, Barr H. The effectiveness of interprofessional education in healthcare: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences. 2018;34(3):160–165. doi: 10.1016/j.kjms.2017.12.009.
18. Dash NR, Guraya SY, Al Bataineh MT, Abdalla ME, Yusoff MSB, Al-Qahtani MF, at al. Preferred teaching styles of medical faculty: an international multi-center study. BMC medical education. 2020;20(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02358-0.
19. Sutkin G, Wagner E, Harris I, Schiffer R. What makes a good clinical teacher in medicine? A review of the literature. Academic Medicine. 2008;83(5):452–466. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31816bee61.
20. Frajerman A, Morvan Y, Krebs M-O, Gorwood P, Chaumette B. Burnout in medical students before residency: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Psychiatry. 2019;55:36–42. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.08.006.