Over the past two decades, there has been an exponential and enthusiastic adoption of simulation in healthcare education internationally. Medicine has learned much from professions that have established programs in simulation for training, such as aviation, the military and space exploration. Increased demands on training hours, limited patient encounters, and a focus on patient safety have led to a new paradigm of education in healthcare that increasingly involves technology and innovative ways to provide a standardized curriculum. A robust body of literature is growing, seeking to answer the question of how best to use simulation in healthcare education. Building on the groundwork of the Best Evidence in Medical Education (BEME) Guide on the features of simulators that lead to effective learning, this current Guide provides practical guidance to aid educators in effectively using simulation for training. It is a selective review to describe best practices and illustrative case studies. This Guide is the second part of a two-part AMEE Guide on simulation in healthcare education. The first Guide focuses on building a simulation program, and discusses more operational topics such as types of simulators, simulation center structure and set-up, fidelity management, and scenario engineering, as well as faculty preparation. This Guide will focus on the educational principles that lead to effective learning, and include topics such as feedback and debriefing, deliberate practice, and curriculum integration - all central to simulation efficacy. The important subjects of mastery learning, range of difficulty, capturing clinical variation, and individualized learning are also examined. Finally, we discuss approaches to team training and suggest future directions. Each section follows a framework of background and definition, its importance to effective use of simulation, practical points with examples, and challenges generally encountered. Simulation-based healthcare education has great potential for use throughout the healthcare education continuum, from undergraduate to continuing education. It can also be used to train a variety of healthcare providers in different disciplines from novices to experts. This Guide aims to equip healthcare educators with the tools to use this learning modality to its full capability.

ObjectivesThis study sought to establish by expert review a consensus‐based, focused ultrasound curriculum, consisting of a foundational set of focused ultrasound skills that all Canadian medical students would be expected to attain at the end of the medical school program.MethodsAn expert panel of 21 point‐of‐care ultrasound and educational leaders representing 15 of 17 (88%) Canadian medical schools was formed and participated in a modified Delphi consensus method. Experts anonymously rated 195 curricular elements on their appropriateness to include in a medical school curriculum using a 5‐point Likert scale. The group defined consensus as 70% or more experts agreeing to include or exclude an element. We determined a priori that no more than 3 rounds of voting would be performed.ResultsOf the 195 curricular elements considered in the first round of voting, the group reached consensus to include 78 and exclude 24. In the second round, consensus was reached to include 4 and exclude 63 elements. In our final round, with 1 additional item added to the survey, the group reached consensus to include an additional 3 and exclude 8 elements. A total of 85 curricular elements reached consensus to be included, with 95 to be excluded. Sixteen elements did not reach consensus to be included or excluded.ConclusionsBy expert opinion‐based consensus, the Canadian Ultrasound Consensus for Undergraduate Medical Education Group recommends that 85 curricular elements be considered for inclusion for teaching in the Canadian medical school focused ultrasound curricula.

This report reviews and critically evaluates the development of 3 movements in healthcare that have had a profound impact on changes occurring at all levels of medical education: patient safety, healthcare simulation, and competency-based education (exemplified by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education). The authors performed a critical and selective review of the literature from 1999 to 2011 to identify uses of simulation to address patient-safety issues aligned according to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education 6 core competencies: (1) patient care; (2) medical knowledge; (3) interpersonal and communication skills; (4) professionalism; (5) practice-based learning; and (6) systems-based practice. The research synthesis is reported to inform and provide evidence about how simulation is used to train and evaluate learners on a range of patient-safety issues for each of the core competencies: There is emerging evidence that simulation can be used in training efforts to reduce medical errors related to medical knowledge and patient care (particular invasive procedures as well as improved communication and teamwork skills). There remains limited evidence on its impact to improve patient safety related to more complex competencies of practice-based learning and systems-based practice. Simulation-based learning can lead to positive patient outcomes and reduction of medical errors particularly when used for individual skills. However, particular attention needs to be placed on the organizational context in which it is implemented if improvements in practice-based learning and systems-based practice are to be realized.

Using a simulation-based mastery learning model, we observed equivalence in learning of ACLS skills for the DSRL and IRL conditions, whereas DSRL was more cost effective.

Our study presents expert consensus-derived ultrasound competencies that should be considered during the design and implementation of procedural skills training for learners.

Most studies in medical education did not describe incentives for participation. Information regarding incentives should be reported in all studies to help inform future recruitment efforts and also to understand the study context including factors that may influence participants motivation.

The 27 videos reviewed contained good-quality general instruction. However, we noted a lack of safety-related information in most of the available videos. Further development of resources is required to teach internal medicine trainees skills that focus on the safety of point-of-care US guidance.

IntroductionThere is considerable variability in symptoms and severity of COVID-19 among patients infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Linking host and virus genome sequence information to antibody response and biological information may identify patient or viral characteristics associated with poor and favourable outcomes. This study aims to (1) identify characteristics of the antibody response that result in maintained immune response and better outcomes, (2) determine the impact of genetic differences on infection severity and immune response, (3) determine the impact of viral lineage on antibody response and patient outcomes and (4) evaluate patient-reported outcomes of receiving host genome, antibody and viral lineage results.Methods and analysisA prospective, observational cohort study is being conducted among adult patients with COVID-19 in the Greater Toronto Area. Blood samples are collected at baseline (during infection) and 1, 6 and 12 months after diagnosis. Serial antibody titres, isotype, antigen target and viral neutralisation will be assessed. Clinical data will be collected from chart reviews and patient surveys. Host genomes and T-cell and B-cell receptors will be sequenced. Viral genomes will be sequenced to identify viral lineage. Regression models will be used to test associations between antibody response, physiological response, genetic markers and patient outcomes. Pathogenic genomic variants related to disease severity, or negative outcomes will be identified and genome wide association will be conducted. Immune repertoire diversity during infection will be correlated with severity of COVID-19 symptoms and human leucocyte antigen-type associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants can learn their genome sequencing, antibody and viral sequencing results; patient-reported outcomes of receiving this information will be assessed through surveys and qualitative interviews.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by Clinical Trials Ontario Streamlined Ethics Review System (CTO Project ID: 3302) and the research ethics boards at participating hospitals. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and end-users.