Search

There continues to be an increase in enrollments in various computing programs at academic institutions due to many job opportunities available in the information, communication, and technology sectors. This enrollment surge has presented several challenges in many Computer Science (CS), Information Technology (IT), and Software Engineering (SE) programs at universities and colleges. One such challenge is that many instructors in CS/IT/SE programs continue to use learning approaches that are not learner centered and therefore are not adequately preparing students to be proficient in the ever-changing computing industry. To mitigate this challenge, instructors need to use evidence-based pedagogical approaches, e.g., active learning, to improve student learning and engagement in the classroom and equip students with the skills necessary to be lifelong learners. This article presents an approach that combines learning and engagement strategies (LESs) in learning environments using different teaching modalities to improve student learning and engagement. We describe how LESs are integrated into face-to-face (F2F) and online class activities. The LESs currently used are "collaborative learning," "gamification," "problem-based learning," and "social interaction." We describe an approach used to quantify each LES used during class activities based on a set of characteristics for LESs and the traditional lecture-style pedagogical approaches. To demonstrate the impact of using LESs in F2F class activities, we report on a study conducted over seven semesters in a software testing class at a large urban minority serving institution. The study uses a posttest-only study design, the scores of two midterm exams, and approximate class times dedicated to each LES and traditional lecture style to quantify their usage in a face-to-face software testing class. The study results showed that increasing the time dedicated to collaborative learning, gamification, and social interaction and decreasing the traditional lecture-style approach resulted in a statistically significant improvement in student learning, as reflected in the exam scores.

Objective: Our medical center implemented a multidisciplinary team to improve surgical decision making for high-risk older adults. To make this a patient-centric process, a pilot program included the patient and their family/caregiver(s) in these conversations. Our hypothesis is that multidisciplinary team discussions can improve difficult surgical decision making. Methods: From January to June 2022, we offered patients and their family participation in multidisciplinary discussions at a Veterans Affairs medical center. Semistructured interviews were conducted 1–6 days after the meeting. Interview transcripts were analyzed with qualitative mixed-methods approach. Results: Six patients and caregivers participated in the interviews. They found the discussion helpful for improving their understanding of the surgical decision. Out of these, 50% (3 of 6) of the patients changed their decision regarding the planned operation based on the discussion. Conclusion: Including patients and caregiver(s) in multidisciplinary surgical decision-making discussions resulted in half of the patients changing their surgical plans. This pilot study demonstrated both acceptance and feasibility for all participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThe diagnosis of blunt abdominal trauma can be challenging and resource intensive. Observation with serial clinical assessments plays a major role in the evaluation of these patients, but the time required for intra-abdominal injury to become clinically apparent is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of time required for an intra-abdominal injury to become clinically apparent after blunt abdominal trauma via physical examination or commonly followed clinical values.MethodsA retrospective review of patients who sustained blunt trauma resulting in intra-abdominal injury between June 2010 and June 2012 at a Level 1 academic trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, injuries, and the amount of time from emergency department admission to sign or symptom development and subsequent diagnosis were recorded. All diagnoses were made by computed tomography or at the time of surgery. Patient transfers from other hospitals were excluded.ResultsOf 3,574 blunt trauma patients admitted to the hospital, 285 (8%) experienced intra-abdominal injuries. The mean (SD) age was 36 (17) years, the majority were male (194 patients, 68%) and the mean (SD) Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 21 (14). The mean (SD) time from admission to diagnosis via computed tomography or surgery was 74 (55) minutes. Eighty patients (28%) required either surgery (78 patients, 17%) or radiographic embolization (2 patients, 0.7%) for their injury. All patients who required intervention demonstrated a sign or symptom of their intra-abdominal injury within 60 minutes of arrival, although two patients were intervened upon in a delayed fashion. All patients with a blunt intra-abdominal injury manifested a clinical sign or symptom of their intra-abdominal injury, resulting in their diagnosis within 8 hours 25 minutes of arrival to the hospital.ConclusionAll diagnosed intra-abdominal injuries from blunt trauma manifested clinical signs or symptoms that could prompt imaging or intervention, leading to their diagnosis within 8 hours 25 minutes of arrival to the hospital. All patients who required an intervention for their injury manifested a sign or symptom of their injury within 60 minutes of arrival.Level of evidenceTherapeutic study, level IV. Epidemiologic study, level III.

Background: Alcohol‐based skin preparations were first approved for surgical use in 1998 and have since become standard in most surgical fields. The purpose of this report is to examine incidence of surgical fires because of alcohol‐based skin preparation and to understand how approval and regulation of alcohol‐based skin preparations impacted trends in fires over time. Methods: We identified all reported surgical fires resulting in patient or staff harm from 1991 through 2020 reported to the Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. We examined incidence of fires because of these preparations, trends after approval and regulation, and common causes. Results: We identified 674 reports of surgical fires resulting in harm to patients and surgical personnel, in which 84 involved an alcohol‐based preparation. The time‐adjusted model shows that from 1996 through 2006, there was a 26.4% increase in fires followed by a 9.7% decrease from 2007 to 2020. The decrease in fires was most rapid for head and neck and upper aerodigestive tract surgeries. Qualitative content analysis revealed improper surgical site preparation as well as close proximity of surgical sites to an oxygen source as the most common causes of fires. Conclusion: Since FDA approval, alcohol‐based preparation solutions have been associated with a significant percentage of surgical fires. Warning label updates from 2006 to 2012 coupled with increased awareness efforts of associated risks of alcohol‐based surgical solutions likely contributed to the decrease in fires. Improper surgical site preparation technique and close proximity of surgical sites to oxygen continue to be risk factors for fires. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 134:607–613, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As software becomes more ubiquitous and complex, the cost of software bugs continues to grow at a staggering rate. To remedy this situation, there needs to be major improvement in the knowledge and application of software validation techniques. Although there are several software validation techniques, software testing continues to be one of the most widely used in industry. The high demand for software engineers in the next decade has resulted in more software engineering (SE) courses being offered in academic institutions. However, due to the number of topics to be covered in SE courses, little or no attention is given to software testing, resulting in students entering industry with little or no testing experience. We propose a minimally disruptive approach of integrating software testing into SE courses by providing students access to a collaborative learning environment containing learning materials on testing techniques and testing tools. In this article, we describe the learning environment and the studies conducted to measure the benefits accrued by students using the learning environment in the SE courses.