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

Introduction: Peer teachers have been found to be effective instructors during simulation-based education. However, there is a lack of research regarding their professional identity development throughout the course of the teaching activity. The purpose of this qualitative study, therefore, was to develop a framework to illustrate how peer teachers develop as educators during a prehospital simulation.

Methods: The participants in our study were 9 second-year medical students serving as peer teachers during a multiday prehospital simulation. We selected the grounded theory tradition of qualitative research to investigate the peer teachers' professional identity development. Our research team interviewed each participant twice during the simulation. We then used open and axial coding to analyze the interview data. We organized these codes into categories and determined connections between each category to construct our grounded theory framework.

Results: This framework described how the peer teachers progressed through 4 stages: 1) eager excitement, 2) grounded by challenges, 3) overcoming challenges, and 4) professional identity formation.

Conclusion: Our results revealed that simulation-based education can serve as valuable learning environment not only for medical students, but also for peer teachers. Understanding their progressive development during the simulation will help medical educators focus on maximizing the peer teachers' growth and development during simulation.

Introduction: Simulation training that includes deliberate practice is effective for procedural skill training. Delivering feedback remotely and asynchronously has been examined for more cost-efficient training. This prospective randomized study aimed to compare 2 feedback techniques for simulation training: synchronous direct feedback versus asynchronous distance feedback (ASYNC).

Methods: Forty anesthesia and internal medicine residents were recruited after study approval by the institutional ethics committee. Residents reviewed instructional material on an online platform and performed a pretraining assessment (PRE) for peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement. Each resident was then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 training types, practice with synchronous direct feedback (SYNC) or practice with ASYNC. Training consisted of four, 1-hour practice sessions; each was conducted once per week. Both groups underwent posttraining evaluation (POST). The PRE and POST assessments were videotaped and evaluated by 2 independent, blinded reviewers using a global rating scale.

Results: Thirty-five residents completed the training program and both evaluations. Both groups had significantly improved global rating scale scores after 4 sessions. The SYNC group improved from 28 to 45 points ( P < 0.01); the ASYNC group improved from 26.5 to 46 points ( P < 0.01). We found no significant between-group differences for the PRE ( P = 0.42) or POST assessments ( P = 0.13).

Conclusion: This simulation-based training program significantly improved residents' peripherally inserted central venous catheter placement skills using either modality. With these results, we are unable to demonstrate the superiority of synchronous feedback over ASYNC. Asynchronous feedback training modality represents a new, innovative approach for health care procedural skills training.

Introduction: Simulated patients (SPs) are trained to simulate real patient scenarios for health professionals' education and training. The value of including SPs in simulated scenarios, particularly in relation to difficult and complex conversations, has been studied in various contexts, with a focus on learner experiences and outcomes. What has not been as extensively explored is the impact of difficult and complex conversations on the SPs. The aim of this study was to explore the perspectives, motivations, and experiences of SPs, particularly regarding difficult or complex conversations.

Methods: A qualitative approach was taken to gather and interpret SP experiences. Open-ended interviews were the primary means of obtaining data. Thematic analysis guided the interpretation of interview data to generate key themes that encapsulated the SP experience.

Results: Twelve participants shared their experiences of working as SPs in scenarios that involved difficult or complex conversations. From these data, 4 major themes were determined: Care for Students , Pedagogical Focus , Emotional Regulation , and Organizational Environment . The importance of empathy and safe design and support for simulations was apparent.

Conclusions: This study presents insights into the experiences and perspectives of SPs regarding difficult and complex conversations. Participants highlighted the necessity of uniformity in standards of practice in simulation and the need for advocacy for awareness of simulation-based practices.

Summary statement: Assessment tools support simulation facilitation skill development by guiding practice, structuring feedback, and promoting reflective learning among educators. This scoping review followed a systematic process to identify facilitation assessment tools used in postlicensure healthcare simulation. Secondary objectives included mapping of the validity evidence to support their use and a critical appraisal of their suitability for simulation faculty development in low-resource settings. Database searching, gray literature searching, and stakeholder engagement identified 11,568 sources for screening, of which 72 met criteria for full text review. Thirty sources met inclusion; 16 unique tools were identified. Tools exclusively originated from simulation practice in high-resource settings and predominantly focused on debriefing. Many tools have limited validity evidence supporting their use. In particular, the validity evidence supporting the extrapolation and implications of assessment is lacking. No current tool has high context suitability for use in low-resource settings.

Summary statement: This article outlines the theoretical development of an approach to simulation prebriefing that we have adopted at Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital. Many educators struggle with anxious or reticent learners during simulation. This reticence often becomes apparent first during the simulation prebrief. Previous work highlights key points to cover in a prebrief. Less work has been done on the dilemma of how to engage such learners while also attempting to maintain a pedagogically effective stance for the entire group. This article pulls together current best practice guidance on prebriefing before exploring pertinent concepts from psychotherapeutic and pedagogical domains-the therapeutic setting, the therapeutic stance, and epistemic trust-which we believe can usefully and practically be applied to simulation practice in the service of engaging reticent learners while enhancing the psychological safety of both learners and educators.

Summary statement: Understanding distance health care simulation debriefing is crucial in light of the increased use of and emerging technology in remote education for reasons of accessibility, global collaboration, and continuous professional development. This article is a confluence of a number of previously published studies designed to serve as a foundation to develop the concept of "engagement in health care distance simulation debriefing" using the Schwartz-Barcott & Kim hybrid mixed methods model. The model uses 3 phases: theoretical (a realist systematic review of the literature), fieldwork (3 exploratory studies and 2 pilot experimental studies), and analytical (analysis of the theoretical and fieldwork findings through expert discussion). This study defines the concept of "engagement in health care simulation distance debriefing" through exploration of its uses and analysis in literature, interviews, and expert review. The hybrid approach to the analysis provided rigor to generate a new, reflective conceptual model. This conceptual model defines the complexity in engagement during distance debriefing and helps shape the development of simulationists and debriefers, leading to more effective distance simulations and debriefings.

Introduction: Ultrasound-guided vascular access is an increasingly popular technique due to its reduced complication and higher success rates. Commercially bought training phantoms allow providers to develop tactile skills in a low-risk setting, but are also expensive and poorly accessible. This study analyzes the efficacy of homemade, low-cost, gelatin-based central line vascular models to teach vascular anatomy and intravascular access techniques in training physicians.

Methods: A gelatin mold was created using a mixture of unflavored gelatin, hot water, psyllium husk powder, and rubbing alcohol. Latex tubing, balloons, precooked hot dog, and tofu were inserted to simulate arteries, veins, nerves, and the sternocleidomastoid muscle, respectively. Medical students from a single institution participated in a 90-minute workshop led by interventional radiology residents. Participants completed presurveys and postsurveys that assessed knowledge acquisition and confidence levels related to acquiring central access. All images were obtained using a USB-C Butterfly iQ probe.

Results: Twenty medical students were analyzed after the workshop. There was a statistically significant increase in self-reported confidence in basic ultrasound use (adjusting gain, depth, probe manipulation), localizing major anatomical structures, using ultrasound for vessel access, and reported ease in identifying muscle, nerves, and major blood vessels under ultrasound. There was also a significant increase in correctly identified anatomical landmarks after the workshop, including the sternocleidomastoid muscle, internal jugular vein, carotid artery, femoral nerve, femoral artery, and femoral vein.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that our homemade, low-cost, gelatin-based models were effective in teaching vascular anatomy and ultrasound-guided vascular access techniques to training physicians.

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.