案例教学法联合问题驱动教学法在免疫学检验教学中的应用效果观察

Observation of the Application Effect of Case Teaching Method Combined with Problem Driven Teaching Method in Immunological Laboratory Teaching

摘要: 目的：探讨案例教学法(Case-Based Learning, CBL)联合问题驱动教学法(Problem-Based Learning, PBL)在免疫学检验教学中的应用效果。方法：选取新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院2023年6月~2024年6月接受免疫学检验课程学习的76名学生，根据不同的教学法分为两组。A组(38名，2023年6月~2023年12月)实施传统教学法，B组(38名，2024年1月~2024年6月)实施CBL联合PBL教学法，比较2组学生的考核成绩(理论知识、实践操作)、临床思维(病例分析、诊断推理、鉴别诊断)、综合能力(问题解决能力、自主学习能力、团队协作能力、沟通表达能力)、教学质量(教学内容、教学方法、师生互动、课堂氛围)。结果：B组理论知识、操作技能考核成绩均高于A组，P均 < 0.001。B组病例分析、诊断推理、鉴别诊断评分均高于A组，P均 < 0.001。B组问题解决、自主学习、团队协作、沟通表达评分(7.98 ± 1.36分、8.62 ± 1.01分、7.85 ± 1.23分、8.37 ± 1.42分)均高于A组(6.25 ± 1.43分、7.09 ± 1.26分、6.37 ± 1.38分、6.51 ± 1.65分)，t = 5.404、5.841、4.935、5.267，P = 0.000、0.000、0.000、0.000。B组教学内容、教学方法、师生互动、课堂氛围评分均高于A组，P均 < 0.001。结论：将CBL联合PBL应用于免疫学检验教学中，不仅能提升学生的理论知识水平和实践操作能力，还能培养其临床思维和综合能力，值得推广。

Abstract: Objective: To explore the application effect of Case Based Learning (CBL) combined with Problem Based Learning (PBL) in immunology laboratory teaching. Method: 76 students who received immunology laboratory courses in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region People’s Hospital from June 2023 to June 2024 were selected and divided into two groups according to different teaching methods. Group A (38 students, June 2023 to December 2023) implemented traditional teaching methods, while Group B (38 students, January 2024 to June 2024) implemented CBL combined with PBL teaching methods. The assessment scores (theoretical knowledge, practical operation), clinical thinking (case analysis, diagnostic reasoning, differential diagnosis), comprehensive abilities (problem-solving ability, self-learning ability, teamwork ability, communication and expression ability), and teaching quality (teaching content, teaching methods, teacher-student interaction, classroom atmosphere) of the two groups of students were compared. Result: The theoretical knowledge and operational skills assessment scores of Group B were higher than those of Group A, both P < 0.001. The case analysis, diagnostic reasoning, and differential diagnosis scores of Group B were all higher than those of Group A, all P < 0.001. The scores for problem-solving, self-directed learning, teamwork, and communication expression in Group B (7.98 ± 1.36 points, 8.62 ± 1.01 points, 7.85 ± 1.23 points, 8.37 ± 1.42 points) were higher than those in Group A (6.25 ± 1.43 points, 7.09 ± 1.26 points, 6.37 ± 1.38 points, 6.51 ± 1.65 points), t = 5.404, 5.841, 4.935, 5.267, P = 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000. The teaching content, teaching methods, teacher-student interaction, and classroom atmosphere scores of Group B were all higher than those of Group A, all P < 0.001. Conclusion: The application of CBL combined with PBL in immunology laboratory teaching can not only improve students’ theoretical knowledge and practical operation ability, but also cultivate their clinical thinking and comprehensive ability, which is worth promoting.