# Clinical Case Summary and Presentation: A Pilot Study to Address the Gap and Improve Medical Students’ Performance in Bedside Teaching

## TL;DR

This study explores how teaching medical students to summarize clinical cases improves their communication skills and confidence during bedside teaching.

## Contribution

The study introduces a structured tutorial to enhance medical students' ability to present clinical cases effectively.

## Key findings

- Students who received a tutorial (group B) showed better performance in medical term usage and comprehensiveness in case presentations.
- Self-assessment scores in group A were higher, but group B students rated the teaching session more positively.
- Most students felt confident after the session, with a majority expecting improved communication skills.

## Abstract

Introduction

Bedside teaching is a well-known clinical teaching method that provides medical students with a real-life experience and patient interaction. As future doctors, medical students need to learn not only how to take a history and perform an examination but also how to present their findings. Providing a summary of a clinical case and presenting it back is an important non-technical skill that is often overlooked during bedside teaching.

Objective

The aim of this prospective pilot study was to evaluate the outcome of teaching undergraduate medical students how to provide a verbal case summary and presentation.

Methods

A total of 45 fourth-year medical students from the University of Glasgow (UOG) completed a pre-teaching survey in two groups: 25 students (group A) attended small group bedside teaching in a cardiac surgery ward only, while 20 students (group B) attended a large group tutorial prior to the bedside session. During the bedside sessions, each student undertook a history and examination and then provided a clinical summary of their encounter to the supervisor. The student and the supervisor then completed a post-teaching assessment.

Results

Of the 45 students, 33 (73%) were “somewhat confident” with their presentation skills; only 28 (62%) had received previous teaching about clinical case summary, while 23 (51%) did not know which information to include or which to omit when summarising. The supervisor’s assessment demonstrated that 16 (84%) students’ presentations out of 19 in group A were “very good” or “excellent” in terms of being in chronological order, 11 (58%) in using medical terms, 10 (53%) in being concise, 15 (79%) in being clear, and 13 (68%) in being comprehensive. These numbers increased in group B to 18 (90%) out of 20, 16 (80%), 13 (65%), 16 (80%), and 15 (75%), respectively, with the greatest improvement being increased use of medical terms.

Using the students' self-assessment, 20 (80%) out of 25 students in group A evaluated their case summary and presentation as being in chronological order, 20 (80%) used medical terms, 15 (60%) were concise, 15 (60%) were clear, and 12 (48%) were comprehensive. In group B, the evaluation of these parameters changed to 15 (75%) out of 20, 15 (75%), eight (40%), 11 (55%) and 13 (65%), respectively. The greatest reduction occurred in the conciseness of the presentations, while there was an increase in the comprehensiveness parameter.

All students from group B evaluated both the tutorial and the bedside session positively across all parameters; 14 (65%) rated their confidence in providing a case summary and presentation after the teaching session between 4 and 5, while 18 (90%) expected their verbal communication skills to improve on a scale of 4-5.

Conclusion

Group B showed improved performance in all parameters according to the supervisor’s assessment, whereas group A students rated their own performance higher than that of group B. More focused and structured teaching about clinical case summary and presentation is required to address the gap in undergraduate medical education.