Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:13:25.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of a novel nutrition education intervention for medical students

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 August 2013

B. Maher
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, University College Cork, Ireland
C. Sweeney
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, University College Cork, Ireland
C. O'Tuathaigh
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, University College Cork, Ireland
S. O'Flynn
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, University College Cork, Ireland
J. E. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Abstract
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2013 

Tomorrow's doctors need to be able to manage the growing burden of nutrition-related illness. Up to 40% of hospital inpatients are malnourished( Reference Edington, Boorman and Durrant 1 )and over half the Irish population is either overweight or obese. Whilst the importance of nutrition education in the medical curriculum is widely acknowledged( Reference Adams, Lindell and Kohlmeier 2 , Reference Johnson, Neild, Jeanes and Bowling3 ), current nutrition education for medical students is usually fragmented, unstandardized, and unintegrated.

The medical school at University College Cork developed an innovative ‘point of practice’ medical nutrition elective module (student-selected module or SSM) for 2nd year students.

Format consisted of lectures delivered by specialist clinical dieticians attached to an affiliated teaching hospital. Content focused on practical issues related to diet rather than nutritional biochemistry. Topics covered a wide range of clinical areas including diabetes, nutritional assessment and cardiovascular disease. Forty-nine students enrolled on the module. Students also gave presentations on key nutritional messages to school-children as part of an Outreach component.

A questionnaire based on course content was construct-validated against key clinical learning outcomes and administered at the beginning and end of the module. A similar number of age and gender matched controls also completed the questionnaire. Four main areas were assessed: students' perceived knowledge; students' knowledge based on a 19-question knowledge ‘test’; skills; and students' attitudes to nutrition education.

Forty-seven students (96%) completed the questionnaire. The primary outcome measure consisted of change in knowledge, attitude and skills scores following intervention. The number of scores of ‘good’ or ‘very good’ in students' self-perceived nutrition knowledge, assessed post-intervention, increased by 134% from the baseline level. Mean knowledge score increased significantly (‘baseline' score −9.5 vs. ‘post-intervention’ −15.5), while the number of ‘good or ‘very good’ answers in the nutrition skills section increased by 192% from baseline level. Similar improvements were not observed in the control group. Students valued the opportunity to learn nutrition from clinical dieticians.

This study highlights medical students' interest in and appreciation of nutrition education. Ideally, nutrition education should be horizontally and vertically integrated throughout the medical programme. Technology-enhanced learning offers opportunities for blended nutrition education in a crowded curriculum. The challenge will be to motivate and educate medical professionals to integrate nutritional knowledge into daily clinical practice, acting as mentors and role models for tomorrow's doctors.

References

1. Edington, J, Boorman, J, Durrant, ER, et al. (2000) Prevalence of malnutrition on admission to four hospitals in England. Clin Nutr. 19, 191e5.Google Scholar
2. Adams, KM, Lindell, KC, Kohlmeier, M, et al. (2006) Status of nutrition education in medical schools. Am J Clin Nutr. 83(4), 941S–4S.Google Scholar
3. Johnson, RD, Neild, P, Jeanes, WM, Bowling, TE, (2009) Nutrition training in UK medical undergraduate programmes. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 68 (OCE1) doi:10.1017/S0029665109001542.Google Scholar