Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare最新文献

Summary statement: Screen-based simulation is an effective educational strategy that can enhance health care students' engagement with content and critical thinking across various topics, including mental health. To create relevant and realistic simulations, best-practice guidelines recommend the involvement of experts in the development process. We collaborated with persons with lived experience and community partners to cocreate a mental health-focused screen-based simulation. Cocreating meant establishing a nonhierarchical partnership, with shared decision-making from start to finish.In this article, we present 8 principles developed to guide our cocreation with persons with lived experience: person-centeredness, trauma-informed approaches and ethical guidance, supportive environment, two-way partnership, mutual respect, choice and flexibility, open communication, and room to grow. These principles provide practical guidance for educators seeking to engage the expertise of persons who have been historically disadvantaged in society. By sharing these principles, we strive to contribute to a more equitable process in simulation development and promote meaningful, respectful, and safer collaborations.

Introduction: Many educators have adopted the Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS) model to guide debriefing sessions in simulation-based learning. The PEARLS Debriefing Checklist (PDC), a 28-item instrument, and the PEARLS Debriefing Adherence Rubric (PDAR), a 13-item instrument, assess facilitator adherence to the model. The aims of this study were to collect evidence of concurrent validity and to evaluate their unique strengths.

Methods: A review of 130 video recorded debriefings from a synchronous high-fidelity mannequin simulation event involving third-year medical students was undertaken. Each debriefing was scored utilizing both instruments. Internal consistency was determined by calculating a Cronbach's α. A Pearson correlation was used to evaluate concurrent validity. Discrimination indices were also calculated.

Results: Cronbach's α values were 0.515 and 0.714 for the PDAR and PDC, respectively, with ≥0.70 to ≤0.90 considered to be an acceptable range. The Pearson correlation coefficient for the total sum of the scores of both instruments was 0.648, with a values between ±0.60 and ±0.80 considered strong correlations. All items on the PDAR had positive discrimination indices; 3 items on the PDC had indices ≤0, with values between -0.2 and 0.2 considered unsatisfactory. Four items on both instruments had indices >0.4, indicating only fair discrimination between high and low performers.

Conclusions: Both instruments exhibit unique strengths and limitations. The PDC demonstrated greater internal consistency, likely secondary to having more items, with the tradeoff of redundant items and laborious implementation. Both had concurrent validity in nearly all subdomains. The PDAR had proportionally more items with high discrimination and no items with indices ≤0. A revised instrument incorporating PDC items with high reliability and validity and removing those identified as redundant or poor discriminators, the PDAR 2, is proposed.

Summary statement: This systematic review aimed to identify, appraise, and synthesize evidence for the effectiveness of simulation modalities in promoting nursing students' empathy. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis was followed with 20 studies included. The Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) was used to evaluate the quality of the publications. The mean MERSQI score was 10.95 with an SD of 1.62, which was above the average in the literature.Five simulation modalities were identified: standardized patient, simulated suit, manikin, virtual simulation, and virtual reality simulation. Most of the studies (n = 15) reported significant differences in the measured outcomes after their simulation activities, including all 5 simulation modalities, but the most effective modality was the simulation suit. The simulation suit replicates the lived experiences of others, which enhances perspective taking by "turning the student into the patient" through the physical and sensory effects of simulated suits. However, outcome measures were limited to self-report instruments in the studies.

Introduction: Debriefing after simulation facilitates reflective thinking and learning. Eye-tracking augmented debriefing (ETAD) may provide advantages over traditional debriefing (TD) by leveraging video replay with first-person perspective. This multisite randomized controlled trial compared the impact of ETAD with TD (without eye-tracking and without video) after simulation on 4 outcomes: (1) resident metacognitive awareness (the primary outcome), (2) cognitive load (CL) of residents and debriefers, (3) alignment of resident self-assessment and debriefer assessment scores, and (4) resident and debriefer perceptions of the debriefing experience.

Method: Fifty-four emergency medicine residents from 2 institutions were randomized to the experimental (ETAD) or the control (TD) arm. Residents completed 2 simulation stations followed by debriefing. Before station 1 and after station 2, residents completed a Metacognition Awareness Inventory (MAI). After each station, debriefers and residents rated their CL and completed an assessment of performance. After the stations, residents were interviewed and debriefers participated in a focus group.

Results: There were no statistically significant differences in mean MAI change, resident CL, or assessment alignment between residents and debriefers. Debriefer CL was lower in the experimental arm. Interviews identified 4 themes: (1) reflections related to debriefing approach, (2) eye-tracking as a metacognitive sensitizer, (3) translation of metacognition to practice, and (4) ETAD as a strategy to manage CL. Residents reported that eye tracking improved the specificity of feedback. Debriefers relied less on notes, leveraged video timestamps, appreciated the structure of the eye-tracking video, and found the video useful when debriefing poor performers.

Conclusions: There were no significant quantitative differences in MAI or resident CL scores; qualitative findings suggest that residents appreciated the benefits of the eye-tracking video review. Debriefers expended less CL and reported less perceived mental effort with the new technology. Future research should leverage longitudinal experimental designs to further understand the impact of eye-tracking facilitated debriefing.

Introduction: Emergency providers risk encountering firearms in the emergency department, but a minority report familiarity with handling firearms. It may be unsafe if unfamiliar, untrained providers attempt to remove a firearm from the clinical care space. This study assessed the efficacy of an educational intervention training resident physicians in this task.

Methods: Five emergency medicine residency programs conducted a prospective, single-blinded randomized controlled trial assessing performance of safely removing a firearm from the clinical care space during a simulated patient encounter. The primary outcome was completion of critical actions previously assessed in a pilot study. Residents viewed a 5-minute educational video developed for this study detailing the principles of safely removing a firearm from the clinical care space. The training video was emailed to prospective participants in the intervention group ahead of the simulation session. Afterward, a debriefing session was held with all participants to review the safe handling of firearms.

Results: Sixty-six of 170 prospective participants (38.8%) consented to participate. There were no significant differences in gender, clinical training level, environment of upbringing, confidence in handling firearms, firearm usage frequency, or prior firearm training. Twenty-nine participants handled the firearm during simulation. The intervention group performed significantly better than the control group, completing a median of 7 critical actions (interquartile range, 7-8) versus 6 critical actions (interquartile range, 5-7), P = 0.035. This effect held among participants who handle firearms outside of work and/or have prior firearms training.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates how a brief educational intervention was associated with improvement in participants' ability to safely remove a firearm from a simulated clinical care space. This approach can be integrated into existing curricula, and its success suggests broad applicability.

Introduction: Virtual patients (VPs) are increasingly used in health professions education. How learners engage with VPs and the relationship between engagement and authenticity is not well understood. We explored learners' perceptions of VP education to gain an understanding of the characteristics promoting meaningful engagement in learning, including perceived authenticity.

Methods: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we conducted interviews and focus groups with 11 students from 2 Canadian Physician Assistant programs, where VP learning was implemented to supplement clinical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explored trainee perspectives on the use of VPs as an educational modality. Data were iteratively collected and descriptively analyzed thematically using a constant comparison approach until theoretical sufficiency was reached.

Results: We identified 3 groups of factors influencing these students' VP learning experiences: (1) technical factors related to the VP platform influenced the perceived authenticity of the patient interactions; (2) individual factors of learners' attitudes influenced their engagement and motivation; and (3) contextual factors related to the learning environment influenced the acceptability and perceived value of the learning experience. Overall, the psychological authenticity of the learning platform and students' motivation for self-directed learning were perceived as most important for students' learning experiences.

Conclusions: Implementing VP learning as a supplement to clinical education should be done with consideration of factors that enhance the psychological authenticity of the learning platform, promote learner engagement and accountability, and encourage acceptability of the learning modality through curricular placement and messaging.

Summary statement: Otherwise known as debriefing the debrief, meta-debriefing describes the practice of debriefing simulation facilitators after they have facilitated, or observed, a debriefing. It is a vital component of enhancing debriefing skills, irrespective of where debriefers may be in terms of their professional development journey from novice to expert. We present the following 4 fundamental pillars, which underpin the creation of an impactful meta-debriefing strategy: theoretically driven, psychologically safe, context dependent, and formative in function. Furthermore, we describe various strategies that, underpinned by these 4 key pillars, contribute to a toolbox of techniques that enable meta-debriefers to develop proficiency and flexibility in their practice. We have synthesized and critically reviewed the current evidence base, derived mostly from the debriefing literature, and highlighted gaps to address in meta-debriefing contexts. We hope this article stimulates discussion among simulation practitioners, progresses the science and art of meta-debriefing, and prompts further research so that meta-debriefing can become an integral evidence-based component of our faculty development processes.

Summary statement: This study highlights the growing significance of healthcare simulation in enhancing the quality and safety of patient care across Latin America and the Caribbean, by analyzing bibliometric trends and the impact of publications on simulation-based clinical training between 2012 and 2022. Leveraging the Scopus database and VOSviewer software for thesaurus interaction analysis, the research identified 610 documents, accumulating 4681 citations, thereby indicating a burgeoning interest in this field with notable publication spikes in 2017 and 2020. Brazil and the United States emerged as leading contributors, with a primary focus on "simulation training," "clinical competence," "medical education," and "education." The study observed an uptick in international collaboration, mirroring the increase in document count and citations. This bibliometric review underscores the emphasis on evaluating technical skills and clinical practices as prevailing areas of interest, highlighting Brazil's significant academic contributions, and suggesting a promising future for the implementation of clinical simulation in the region. The study advocates for continued scholarly output to align with global advancements in medical simulation, aiming to optimize patient outcomes.