Putting the "learning" in "pre-learning": effects of a self-directed study hall on skill acquisition in a simulation-based central line insertion course.
Emily Diederich, Matthew Lineberry, Vanessa Schott, Julie Broski, Ahmed Alsayer, Krista A Eckels, Megan J Murray, William Huynh, Laura A Thomas
{"title":"Putting the \"learning\" in \"pre-learning\": effects of a self-directed study hall on skill acquisition in a simulation-based central line insertion course.","authors":"Emily Diederich, Matthew Lineberry, Vanessa Schott, Julie Broski, Ahmed Alsayer, Krista A Eckels, Megan J Murray, William Huynh, Laura A Thomas","doi":"10.1186/s41077-023-00261-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Opportunities to practice procedural skills in the clinical learning environment are decreasing, and faculty time to coach skills is limited, even in simulation-based training. Self-directed learning with hands-on practice early in a procedural skill course might help maximize the benefit of later faculty coaching and clinical experience. However, it may also lead to well-learned errors if learners lack critical guidance. The present study sought to investigate the effects of a hands-on, self-directed \"study hall\" for central line insertion among first-year residents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Learner cohorts before vs. after introduction of the study hall (n = 49) were compared on their pre- and post-test performance of key procedural behaviors that were comparable across cohorts, with all learners receiving traditional instructor-led training between tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Study hall participants spent a median of 116 min in hands-on practice (range 57-175). They scored higher at pre-test (44% vs. 27%, p = .00; Cohen's d = 0.95) and at post-test (80% vs. 72%, p = .02; Cohen's d = 0.69). A dose-response relationship was found, such that 2 h of study hall were roughly equivalent to the performance improvement seen with four clinical observations or supervised insertions of central lines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Self-directed, hands-on \"study hall\" supported improved procedural skill learning in the context of limited faculty availability. Potential additional benefits make the approach worth further experimentation and evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":72108,"journal":{"name":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","volume":"8 1","pages":"21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10486059/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-023-00261-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Opportunities to practice procedural skills in the clinical learning environment are decreasing, and faculty time to coach skills is limited, even in simulation-based training. Self-directed learning with hands-on practice early in a procedural skill course might help maximize the benefit of later faculty coaching and clinical experience. However, it may also lead to well-learned errors if learners lack critical guidance. The present study sought to investigate the effects of a hands-on, self-directed "study hall" for central line insertion among first-year residents.
Methods: Learner cohorts before vs. after introduction of the study hall (n = 49) were compared on their pre- and post-test performance of key procedural behaviors that were comparable across cohorts, with all learners receiving traditional instructor-led training between tests.
Results: Study hall participants spent a median of 116 min in hands-on practice (range 57-175). They scored higher at pre-test (44% vs. 27%, p = .00; Cohen's d = 0.95) and at post-test (80% vs. 72%, p = .02; Cohen's d = 0.69). A dose-response relationship was found, such that 2 h of study hall were roughly equivalent to the performance improvement seen with four clinical observations or supervised insertions of central lines.
Conclusions: Self-directed, hands-on "study hall" supported improved procedural skill learning in the context of limited faculty availability. Potential additional benefits make the approach worth further experimentation and evaluation.
背景:在临床学习环境中练习程序技能的机会正在减少,教师指导技能的时间有限,即使是在模拟训练中。在程序技能课程的早期,自主学习和动手实践可能有助于最大限度地提高后来的教师指导和临床经验。然而,如果学习者缺乏批判性的指导,也可能导致习得良好的错误。本研究旨在调查在第一年住院医师中,亲自动手、自我指导的“自习室”对中心线路插入的影响。方法:在引入学习厅之前和之后的学习者队列(n = 49)中,比较他们在关键程序行为的测试前和测试后的表现,这些行为在队列之间具有可比性,所有学习者在测试之间接受传统的教师指导培训。结果:研究大厅的参与者花在动手练习上的平均时间为116分钟(范围为57-175分钟)。他们在测试前得分更高(44%对27%,p = .00;Cohen’s d = 0.95)和测试后(80% vs. 72%, p = 0.02;Cohen’s d = 0.69)。我们发现了一种剂量-反应关系,即2小时的研究时间大致相当于4次临床观察或有监督的中心静脉注射所带来的表现改善。结论:在教师资源有限的情况下,自我指导、动手的“自习室”支持改进程序技能学习。潜在的额外好处使该方法值得进一步试验和评估。