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

Summary statement: Health care policies have the potential to improve patient outcomes, access to care, and reduce health disparities. However, new policy is often tested in the field, where unintended consequences are paid for by patients. In this perspective, we argue that health care simulations, which can elucidate the potential for policy to hinder clinicians' ability to provide high-quality care, are a complement to large-scale policy evaluations in the field.

Summary statement: Bibliometrics quantitatively evaluates the targeted literature sources and can help define research and scholarly publications' impact and demonstrate connections for authors, departments, or universities. This article presents a methodology for simulation programs to evaluate their influence in terms of both impact and scope of their published simulation-based healthcare scholarly output. Using the authors' home university and healthcare system as an example, the article outlines a methodology to map research and scholarly works networks within the systems, identify and map connections outside the system, and quantifiably score the overall impact of the simulation program's scholarly output using a common scoring metric, the h-index. This generates an objective measure of impact, rather than a subjective opinion of an organization's research and scholarly impact. The combination of an institutional h-index with mapping of simulation-based healthcare scholarly output provides a full, objective description of the institution's output and provides a benchmark for other simulation programs for comparison.

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: 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.

Introduction: Well-designed simulation-based learning (SBL) experiences enhance students' self-confidence, self-efficacy, clinical judgment, and psychomotor skill development. An emerging concept in SBL research is psychological safety. There is currently no research on factors influencing psychological safety specifically related to the SBL environment, nor is there any literature found to determine whether intrinsic student characteristic, such as self-compassion and resilience, contributes to SBL learning outcomes. The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a relationship between nursing students' intrinsic characteristics (self-compassion, resilience, and anxiety sensitivity) and their psychological safety.

Methods: Bivariate correlation was used to examine associations among sociodemographic variables and outcome variables. Multiple regression was used to determine the predictive nature of the sociodemographic variables. Assumptions for variables in multiple regression models were tested (normal distribution, heteroscedasticity, multicollinearity). All data were analyzed in SPSS, Version 28. The P value of significance was set at 0.05 for all analyses.

Results: Most of the 118 participants were non-Hispanic (89%), White (65%), and females (95%). Results of the demographic bivariate analysis revealed no significant differences among this diverse group or semester in the curriculum for psychological safety. The multiple regression found self-compassion (β = 29, P = 0.004), anxiety sensitivity (β = -0.16, P = 0.049), and resilience (β = 0.26, P = 0.004) predict psychological safety.

Conclusions: The importance of creating a psychologically safe learning environment has been recognized as essential to best practices. Our findings suggest that an understanding of student characteristics that impact their perception of psychological safety will allow educators to develop strategies to better support learners in the simulation environment.

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: We describe the development and validation of a mixed-reality prostate biopsy (PBx) simulator with built-in guidance aids and real-time 3-dimensional visualization.

Methods: We evaluated our simulator during one-on-one training sessions with urology residents and attendings from 2018 to 2022. Participants performed freehand, side-fire, double-sextant transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy (sPBx). After a baseline assessment (first set of 12 biopsy cores), participants trained for 25 minutes with visualization and cognitive aids activated. Training was followed by an exit set of 12 biopsy cores without visualization or cognitive aids and afterward, subjective assessment by trainees of the simulator. Deviation is the shortest distance of the center of a core from its intended template location.

Results: Baseline deviations (mean ± SD) for residents (n = 24) and attendings (n = 4) were 13.4 ± 8.9 mm and 8.5 ± 3.6 mm ( P < 0.001), respectively. Posttraining deviations were 8.7 ± 6.6 mm and 7.6 ± 3.7 mm ( P = 0.271), respectively. Deviations between baseline and exit were decreased significantly for residents ( P < 0.001) but not for attendings ( P = 0.093). Overall feedback from participants was positive. Confidence in performing a PBx increased in novices after training ( P = 0.011) and did not change among attendings ( P = 0.180).

Conclusions: A new PBx simulator can quantify and improve accuracy during simulated freehand sPBx while providing visualization and graphical feedback. Improved simulated sPBx accuracy could lead to more even distribution of biopsy cores within the prostate when performed in clinical settings, possibly reducing the high risk of missing an existing lesion and thus decreasing the time to initiating treatment, if indicated.

Statement: There continues to be a lack of detailed understanding of how debriefing works and how it enables learning. To further our understanding and simultaneously illuminate current knowledge, a metaethnographic qualitative synthesis was undertaken to address the research question: how are interactions in simulation debriefing related to participant learning? Ten databases were searched (up to November 2020) and 17 articles were selected for inclusion. Initial interpretive synthesis generated 37 new concepts that were further synthesized to produce a new theoretical framework. At the heart of the framework is a concept of reflective work , where participants and faculty recontextualize the simulation experience bidirectionally with clinical reality: a process that facilitates sensemaking. This occurs in a learning milieu where activities such as storytelling, performance evaluation, perspective sharing, agenda setting, and video use are undertaken. The outcome is conceptualization of new future roles, clinical competence, and professional language development-a process of transforming professional identity.