Bedside teaching is seen as one of the most important component of medical education. It provides students and trainees with an opportunity to learn several clinical skills such as history taking, physical examination, clinical reasoning, decision making, communication and professionalism.¹ It requires considerable enthusiasm and commitment on the part of both teacher and learner and willingness to cooperate on the part of patient who plays a crucial role in this educational method.

Several studies have shown that the majority of patients had positive attitudes towards the involvement of medical students,^2-5 they even enjoyed their contribution in improving the training of the medical workforce, resulting in improved healthcare for the whole population.^3,4,6,7   However, these attitudes vary across regions and countries and seem to be determined by various socio-demographic factors and cultural issues.³Many of these factors, as female gender,^8-10 male student’s gender,¹¹ and Islam religion^{11, 12} have shown to be associated with greater refusal rates of medical students presence, which may hinder bedside teaching and even affect the quality of medical education, especially in countries, like Tunisia, where alternative learning approaches are not developed yet.

In fact, medical education in Tunisia is characterised by being very traditional, with large number of students and hospital based education. Clinical teaching takes place in the third to fifth years of medical training. During these three years, medical students rotate through different medical and surgical departments where they spend about four hours a day experiencing patient-based clinical teaching; some of them perform clinical examination on their own, later they report their findings to the supervising clinician who corrects or confirms these findings and demonstrates the correct examination.

Playing a passive role in this approach, patients simply act as “teaching material”. However, since the transition, patient’s rights and informed consent have gained greater visibility, and patients now have the right to choose whether to have medical students involved in their care or not. These facts have prompted us to conduct this study to assess Tunisian patients’ attitude towards bedside teaching at the University Hospital of Monastir and to identify factors that may potentially influence their decision to allow or refuse medical students’ participation in their care, so that academic institutions would be adequately prepared to address different scenarios in order to guarantee high quality medical education. The aims of this study were twofold. The first was to assess patients’ attitude towards the presence of medical students at the Teaching Hospital of Monastir. The second was to identify factors that may affect this attitude in order to act upon them for better bedside teaching.

This study contributed to the understanding of Tunisian patients ‘attitude towards the involvement of medical students in their care.  It showed a high level of patients’ acceptability of the presence of medical students in Teaching Hospitals. This finding coincides with the results of other studies in the Arab World^8,13-16 and in developed countries.^3,17,18 Many possible reasons for this high allowance were discussed in the literature, as the patients’ desire to contribute to medical education, the extra time that physicians may spend with them, and the opportunity to talk about their problem and to learn more about their condition.^{5, 17, 19-22}

This positive reaction varied with the extent of involvement of medical students in the care process. The highest levels of acceptability were found in situations where there is a minimal direct contact between patients and students; such as reading medical files (93%, 331), being present in outpatient clinic (93.5%, 333) and attending ward rounds (93.8%, 334).There was however, some reluctance to students’ presence during childbirth (70.7%, 140), pelvic examination and procedures (such as digital rectal examination, urethral catheterization, vaginal examination etc.). This finding has been documented in several studies especially those conducted in Muslim countries where cultural and religious issues might affect the attitude of patients toward medical students and particularly the attitude of female patients toward male students^5,13,14,23 which may lead to a poorer clinical experience for male students.²⁴

As the degree of student involvement increased (from observation to history taking to examination and procedures), the refusal rate increased; especially when the parts examined were obviously sensitive (such as vaginal examination and digital rectal examination). This may be due to privacy-related concerns. Another common reason for objecting towards students’ involvement in physical examination, reported in the literature, was low confidence in medical students ‘skills to do a proper examination that detects findings^8,24 which may explain the fact that the refusal rate was lower when an exam was performed by the student in the clinician’s supervision. This finding is consistent with other studies^8,15,24,25  and matches with the results of Sayed-Hassan RM et al,⁵ who concluded that the patient’s feeling of safety and comfort is correlated to the presence of a supervisor.

The study also revealed that patients ‘reaction towards medical students depends on certain characteristics of patients themselves (such as gender, age, marital status, education level and occupation). Female patients showed higher acceptance of both genders of medical students when asked about situations where there was a minimal direct contact with students. However, when significant disrobing and embarrassing examinations were performed (for example during digital rectal examination or urinary catheterization), they were less likely than male patients to accept students of either gender. This finding is in agreement with that previously obtained by Shah-Khan M et al,¹⁰ and by Shann S et al ⁹ and may be explained by the higher sensitivity of women compared to men. On the other hand, patients with positive reaction towards the involvement of students in pelvic examination and intimate procedures were likely to be older (≥ 40 years old) and to have lower educational level. This could be because older patients are less likely to get embarrassed when exposed in front of others, and patients who had lower educational level believed that they had not the right to refuse medical students. However, in the study of Anfinan et al,¹⁴ and that of Shah-Khan et al,¹⁰ no significant association was observed between patients‘ attitudes and their age or their  educational level. The influence of marital status had been shown only among women patients when asked about their reaction towards students’ involvement in breast and pelvic examination and procedures, and may be explained by the fact that married women have an experience with gynecological examination.

Other studies have indicated that religion,¹¹economic level,^5,26 severity of diagnoses¹⁰ and previous experiences with medical trainees^2,3,27,28 may affect patients’ reaction toward medical students. Besides, Saeed F et al²⁶ has documented that informing patients about the presence of student and obtaining their consent was associated with a positive attitude to be involved in teaching. In this study, only 21.9% of participants (n=78) thought that students were involved in their care which means that the majority of patients were not informed about the presence of medical students and therefore their consent was not obtained. This finding is in agreement with the result of O’Flynn N et al²⁹ who found that 28% of patients believed that they did not have a choice about students presence and participation. Moreover, Sayad-Hassan RM et al,⁵reported that more than two thirds of patients were unaware of their right to refuse or accept the involvement of medical student, which represents an ethical issue  given the mandatory nature of patients’ consent and its crucial role in establishing a positive patient and medical student relationship.¹³ Indeed, the acceptance and willingness of patients to be involved in clinical teaching should not be taken for granted. Instead, we should seek methods to promote patients’ cooperation. Communication is one of the strategic pillars on which we have to focus; by informing patients of the presence of the student and explaining to them his role and the degree of his involvement, we can reduce their fear and convince them to accept to be involved in the teaching process. Targeted messages should be delivered especially to single young women, people under 40 years old and well educated patients who showed some reluctance to students’ involvement in physical examination and procedures. On the other hand, we should valorize patients’ role as educators; as they have unique expertise derived from their experience of illness, disability or the effects of the social determinants of health, important messages that cannot be taught to students from a textbook.³⁰ In this context, an active involvement of patients as educators is increasingly being recognized as a powerful educational strategy for both patients and learners. Bleakley and Bligh³¹ build on these concepts to propose a radical overhaul of conventional doctor-led medical education leading to an authentic patient-centred model that shifts the locus of learning from the relationship between doctor (as teacher) and student (as learner) with patients playing a supportive role, to the relationship between patient (as educator) and student (both as learner and co-educator) with the doctor-educator playing a supportive role.

However, in situations where patients’ consent for students involvement may not always be obtained, alternative strategies should be sought to ensure that students develop the required competencies; simulation using manikins and models should be considered as a standard method for learning intimate examination and invasive procedures for both male and female students without harming, disturbing or embarrassing patients.³² Another valuable tool in the teaching of physical diagnosis is the use of simulating patients who can provide good training on the choreography of physical examination, increasing students’ confidence in their techniques. Finally, the use of interactive multimedia programs (live demonstrations, slide shows, computerized animations and videotapes), should be explored as possible tools to improve physical diagnosis skills.^1,33 Although effective and safe, all these methods should be considered to address scenarios that most patients are unwilling to allow students to participate but not to replace bedside teaching.

In conclusion, Tunisian patients showed overall positive attitude towards bedside teaching. This attitude appeared to be affected by patients’ characteristics (gender, age, educational level and marital status) and the extent of students’ involvement in their care. Taking advantage of this attitude, valorizing patients’ role as educators and using further learning methods in situations where patients’ consent for student involvement was not obtained should be considered to guarantee optimal care and safety to patients and good medical education to future physicians.