Objective To compare the application effect between problem-based learning (PBL) and traditional teaching in cardiovascular intervention . Methods 39 training physicians were divided randomly into the PBL group (n=20) and control group (n=19). The control group was trained with the tradi-tional teaching method while PBL group used PBL seven step method, namely they were trained through the process of clarifying unfamiliar terms—defining the problem—brainstorming—restructuring problem—defining learning goals—collecting information, personal learning, information sharing, and group discus-sion. After the end of the training, the two groups were tested by using the unified test questions and skills test, and the questionnaire survey of teaching satisfaction. SPSS 18.0 was used to do line t test or chi square test to the data of both groups. Results PBL group training physicians' cardiovascular intervention oper-ation [(30.07±1.67) vs. (28.54±1.98), P=0.036], their comprehensive analysis of clinical cases, [(34.47± 1.77) vs. (32.08 ±1.80), P=0.002], and the total score [(86.47 ±2.75) vs. (82.23 ±3.63), P=0.002], were better than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant. The survey results showed that the PBL group's evaluation on how the teaching methods stimulate the training physicians' interest in learning, enhance their ability of independent thinking and cultivate their teamwork ability, improve their language expression and clinical thinking and other aspects was higher than the control group (P<0.05).
Conclusion Compared with the traditional teaching, the application effect of PBL in the training of car-diovascular intervention can better exert training physicians' subjective initiative and improve the teaching effect.