Isn’t here just there without a “t” – To what extent can digital clinical case discussions compensate for the absence of face-to-face teaching?

Objective: COVID-19 challenges curriculum managers worldwide to create digital substitutes for classroom teaching Case-based teaching formats under expert supervision can be used as a substitute for practical bedside teaching, where the focus is on teaching clinical reasoning skills Methods: For medical students of LMU and TU Munich, the interactive, case-based, and supervised teaching format of Clinical Case Discussion (CCD) was digitised and implemented as dCCD in their respective cur-ricula Case discussions were realised as videoconferences, led by a student moderator, and took place under the supervision of a board-certified clinician To prevent passive participation, additional cognitive activations were implemented Acceptance, usability, and subjective learning outcomes were assessed in dCCDs by means of a special evaluation concept Results: With regard to acceptance, students were of the opinion that they had learned effectively by participating in dCCDs (M=4 31;SD=1 37) The majority of students also stated that they would recom-mend the course to others (M=4 23;SD=1 62) The technical implementation of the teaching format was judged positively overall, but findings for usability were heterogeneous Students rated their clinical reasoning skills at the end of the dCCDs (M=4 43;SD=0 66) as being significantly higher than at the beginning (M=4 33;SD=0 69), with low effect size, t(181)=-2 352, p= 020, d=0 15 Conclusion: Our evaluation data shows that the dCCD format is well-accepted by students as a substitute for face-to-face teaching In the next step, we plan to examine the extent to which participation in dCCDs leads to an increase in objectively measured clinical reasoning skills, analogous to a face-to-face CCD with on-site attendance © 2020 Zottmann et al