Remote feedback in endovascular simulation training: a mixed-methods study.

IF 2.8 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Advances in simulation (London, England) Pub Date : 2024-06-11 DOI:10.1186/s41077-024-00297-0
Adam F Roche, Daragh Moneley, Tim Lawler, Emily Boyle, Greg Gosi, Adrian O'Callaghan, Caitriona Cahir, Dara O'Keeffe, Claire M Condron
{"title":"Remote feedback in endovascular simulation training: a mixed-methods study.","authors":"Adam F Roche, Daragh Moneley, Tim Lawler, Emily Boyle, Greg Gosi, Adrian O'Callaghan, Caitriona Cahir, Dara O'Keeffe, Claire M Condron","doi":"10.1186/s41077-024-00297-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is an increasing need to increase simulation-based learning opportunities for vascular surgery residents in endovascular skills training. This study aims to explore the effectiveness of remote expert instructional feedback of endovascular simulation-based education, as a means of increasing training opportunities in this area for vascular surgery residents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods study design was adopted. Twelve vascular surgery residents from Ireland were tasked with completing two endovascular renal artery procedures: one with in-person expert feedback and the other with remote instruction. Participants ranged in experience levels from second year to final year of residency. Following the training activities, interviews and a questionnaire were employed to gather information on the usefulness of remote feedback.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference reported by participants using a post-event validated questionnaire between remote and in-person feedback. During the interviews, participants expressed mixed feelings about the presence of the educator while practicing, but they eventually saw no limiting factors to their practice when the trainer provided remote feedback. When receiving performance feedback remotely, clear communication and a shared knowledge of the task development are critical to success.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We believe these findings can inform the design and development of remote learning and assessment of endovascular skills training and ultimately provide increased opportunities for more skills practice for vascular surgical residents.</p>","PeriodicalId":72108,"journal":{"name":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","volume":"9 1","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11165733/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00297-0","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: There is an increasing need to increase simulation-based learning opportunities for vascular surgery residents in endovascular skills training. This study aims to explore the effectiveness of remote expert instructional feedback of endovascular simulation-based education, as a means of increasing training opportunities in this area for vascular surgery residents.

Methods: A mixed-methods study design was adopted. Twelve vascular surgery residents from Ireland were tasked with completing two endovascular renal artery procedures: one with in-person expert feedback and the other with remote instruction. Participants ranged in experience levels from second year to final year of residency. Following the training activities, interviews and a questionnaire were employed to gather information on the usefulness of remote feedback.

Results: There was no significant difference reported by participants using a post-event validated questionnaire between remote and in-person feedback. During the interviews, participants expressed mixed feelings about the presence of the educator while practicing, but they eventually saw no limiting factors to their practice when the trainer provided remote feedback. When receiving performance feedback remotely, clear communication and a shared knowledge of the task development are critical to success.

Conclusions: We believe these findings can inform the design and development of remote learning and assessment of endovascular skills training and ultimately provide increased opportunities for more skills practice for vascular surgical residents.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
血管内模拟训练中的远程反馈:一项混合方法研究。
背景:血管外科住院医师在血管内技能培训中越来越需要增加模拟学习机会。本研究旨在探讨血管内模拟教学远程专家指导反馈的有效性,以此增加血管外科住院医师在该领域的培训机会:方法:采用混合方法研究设计。来自爱尔兰的 12 名血管外科住院医师负责完成两例血管内肾动脉手术:一例由专家现场反馈,另一例由远程指导。参与者的经验水平从第二年到最后一年的住院医生不等。培训活动结束后,通过访谈和问卷调查收集了有关远程反馈有用性的信息:结果:学员们在活动后的验证问卷中表示,远程反馈和现场反馈没有明显差异。在访谈中,学员们对练习时教育者是否在场的问题褒贬不一,但他们最终认为培训师提供远程反馈时并没有限制他们练习的因素。在远程接受绩效反馈时,清晰的沟通和对任务发展的共同认知是成功的关键:我们相信,这些发现可以为血管内技能培训的远程学习和评估的设计与开发提供参考,并最终为血管外科住院医师提供更多的技能练习机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Educational design insights for interprofessional immersive simulation to prepare allied health students for clinical placements. Massive open online course: a new strategy for faculty development needs in healthcare simulation. Changing the conversation: impact of guidelines designed to optimize interprofessional facilitation of simulation-based team training. Speech recognition technology for assessing team debriefing communication and interaction patterns: An algorithmic toolkit for healthcare simulation educators. Effectiveness of hybrid simulation training on medical student performance in whole-task consultation of cardiac patients: The ASSIMILATE EXCELLENCE randomized waitlist-controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1