Background Simulation-based education (SBE) with high-fidelity simulation (HFS) offers medical students early exposure to the clinical environment, allowing development of clinical scenarios and management. We hypothesized that supplementation of standard pulmonary physiology curriculum with HFS would improve the performance of first-year medical students on written tests of pulmonary physiology. Methods This observational pilot study included SBE with three HFS scenarios of patient care that highlighted basic pulmonary physiology. First-year medical students’ test scores of their cardio-pulmonary curriculum were compared between students who participated in SBE versus only lecture-based education (LBE). A survey was administered to the SBE group to assess their perception of the HFS. Results From a class of 188 first-year medical students, 89 (47%) participated in the SBE and the remaining 99 were considered as the LBE group. On their cardio-pulmonary curriculum test, the SBE group had a median score of 106 [IQR: 97,110] and LBE group of 99 [IQR: 89,105] (p < 0.001). For the pulmonary physiology subsection, scores were also significantly different between groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions Implementation of supplemental SBE could be an adequate technique to improve learning enhancement and overall satisfaction in preclinical medical students.
Introduction Although the benefits of using cognitive aids in anesthesia care have previously been demonstrated, several challenges remain. It must be presented in a timely manner, and providers must be amenable to using the tool once it is available. We hypothesized that anesthesia residents would perform superiorly when presented with a digital cognitive aid (DCogA) that is automatically triggered by a set vital sign aberration. Methods Thirty anesthesia residents were randomized to either control (with access to hard copy of the cognitive aid) or receive a DCogA projected on their anesthesia information management system with the onset of heart block and associated hypotension. The scenario ended upon commencement of pacing, and the times to interventions were recorded. Results Fourteen participants were randomized to the control group and 16 to the intervention group DCogA. In the control group, 6 of 14 participants failed to pace, and in the DCogA group, all participants initiated pacing (P < 0.01). Those in the DCogA group were also faster to pace [260.1 (137.5) s vs. 405.1 (201.8) s, P = 0.03]. Both groups were similar with respect to their knowledge of advanced cardiovascular life support as measured by a pretest (P = 0.92). Conclusions We found those participants who were presented with electronic, physiologically triggered cognitive aids were more likely to appropriately treat heart block by initiating transcutaneous pacing. We believe that adoption of a high-functioning anesthesia information management system designed to detect physiologic perturbations and present appropriate decision support tools would lead to safer intraoperative care.
Anesthesiologists and surgeons have demonstrated a lack of familiarity with professional guidelines when providing care for surgical patients with a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order. This substantially infringes on patient's self-autonomy; therefore, leading to substandard care particularly for palliative surgical procedures. The interventional nature of surgical procedures may create a different mentality of surgical “buy-in,” that may unintentionally prioritize survivability over maintaining patient self-autonomy. While previous literature has demonstrated gains in communication skills with simulation training, no specific educational curriculum has been proposed to specifically address perioperative code status discussions. We designed a simulated standardized patient actor (SPA) encounter at the beginning of post-graduate year (PGY) 2, corresponding to the initiation of anesthesiology specific training, allowing residents to focus on the perioperative discussion in relation to the SPA's DNR order. Forty four anesthesiology residents volunteered to participate in the study. PGY-2 group (n = 17) completed an immediate post-intervention assessment, while PGY-3 group (n = 13) completed the assessment approximately 1 year after the educational initiative to ascertain retention. PGY-4 residents (n = 14) did not undergo any specific educational intervention on the topic, but were given the same assessment. The assessment consisted of an anonymized survey that examined familiarity with professional guidelines and hospital policies in relation to perioperative DNR orders. Subsequently, survey responses were compared between classes. Study participants that had not participated in the educational intervention reported a lack of prior formalized instruction on caring for intraoperative DNR patients. Second and third year residents outperformed senior residents in being aware of the professional guidelines that detail perioperative code status decision-making (47%, 62% vs 21%, P = .004). PGY-3 residents outperformed PGY-4 residents in correctly identifying a commonly held misconception that institutional policies allow for automatic perioperative DNR suspensions (85% vs 43%; P = .02). Residents from the PGY-3 class, who were 1 year removed the educational intervention while gaining 1 additional year of clinical anesthesiology training, consistently outperformed more senior residents who never received the intervention. Our training model for code-status training with anesthesiology residents showed significant gains. The best results were achieved when combining clinical experience with focused educational training.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.