medigraphic.com
ISSN 2683-2348 (Electronic)
Federación Latinoamericana de Simulación Clínica y Seguridad del Paciente

2025, Number 3

Next >>

Simulación Clínica 2025; 7 (3)

Challenges and recommendations for the accreditation of simulation centers according to Latin American criteria (FLASIC)

Díaz-Guio DA, Rodríguez-Vargas A, Sambuceti C, Ávila J, Figueroa C, Ricardo-Zapata A

Language: Spanish
References: 44
Page: 83-91
PDF size: 643.15 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Simulation-based education (SBE) has become a fundamental active methodology for developing both technical and non-technical skills in healthcare professionals. However, its expansion across Latin America presents significant challenges related to cultural diversity, economic limitations, and heterogeneous educational infrastructure. In this context, accrediting clinical simulation centers is a valuable strategy for ensuring quality standards, sustainability, and continuous improvement. This article presents a critical and applied reflection on the implementation of the accreditation model developed by the Latin American Federation of Clinical Simulation and Patient Safety (FLASIC), based on the accumulated experience of five simulation centers in Colombia and Chile. The article analyzes each of the model's seven dimensions, identifies common challenges, and proposes practical implementation strategies. This experience shows that accreditation is a transformative process that strengthens organizational culture, guides strategic decision-making, and improves the quality of training through clinical simulation, not merely an institutional goal.


REFERENCES

  1. Díaz-Guio DA, Ruiz-Ortega FJ. Relationship among mental models , theories of change , and metacognition : structured clinical simulation. Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology. 2019; 47 (14): 113-116. Available in: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CJ9.0000000000000107

  2. Díaz-Guio DA, Rojas M, Ricardo-Zapata A. Reflections on Teacher Identity: Epistemological Perspectives on Clinical Simulation. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología-Serie de Conferencias. 2023; 2.

  3. Díaz-Guio DA, Ricardo-Zapata A, Ospina-Velez J, Gómez-Candamil G, Mora-Martinez S, Rodriguez-Morales A. Cognitive load and performance of health care professionals in donning and doffing PPE before and after a simulation-based educational intervention and its implications during the COVID-19 pandemic for biosafety. Infez Med. 2020; 28 (Suppl 1): 111-117. Available in: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32532947/

  4. Díaz-Guio DA, Ríos-Barrientos E, Santillán-Roldan PA, Medina V, Salazar-Ocampo DF, Cimadevilla-Calvo B et al. Factores humanos y seguridad del personal de salud en tiempos de pandemia. Simulación Clínica. 2020; 2 (2): 81-85.

  5. Lazzara EH, Benishek LE, Dietz AS, Salas E, Adriansen DJ. Eight critical factors in creating and implementing a successful simulation program. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2014; 40 (1): 21-29.

  6. Armijo-Rivera S, Machuca-Contreras F, Raul N, de Oliveira SN, Mendoza IB, Miyasato HS, et al. Characterization of simulation centers and programs in Latin America according to the ASPIRE and SSH quality criteria. Adv Simul (Lond). 2021; 6 (1): 1-11.

  7. Diaz-Navarro C, Armstrong R, Charnetski M, Freeman KJ, Koh S, Reedy G, et al. Global consensus statement on simulation-based practice in healthcare. Adv Simul. 2024; 9 (1): 19.

  8. Lewis KL, Bohnert CA, Gammon WL, Hölzer H, Lyman L, Smith C, et al. The Association of Standardized Patient Educators (ASPE) Standards of Best Practice (SOBP). Adv Simul (Lond). 2017; 2 (1): 1-8.

  9. Persico L, Belle A, DiGregorio H, Wilson-Keates B, Shelton C. Healthcare simulation standards of best practice facilitation. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021; 58: 22-26.

  10. Charnetski M, Jarvill M. Healthcare simulation standards of best practice operations. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021; 58: 33-39.

  11. Donabedian A. The quality of care: how can it be assessed? 1988; 260 (12): 1743-1748.

  12. Hunt D, Klamen D, Harden RM, Ali F. The ASPIRE-to-excellence program: A global effort to improve the quality of medical education. Acad Med. 2018; 93 (8): 1117-1119.

  13. FLASIC. Modelo de Acreditación en Simulación Disponible en: https://www.flasic.org/acreditaci%C3%B3n

  14. Gazmuri P, Díaz-Guio D. Administración académica y operativa de centros de simulación. In: Armijo-Rivera S, editor. Manual para la inserción curricular de simulación. Santiago: Universidad del Desarrollo; 2021. pp. 23-35.

  15. Kritsonis A. Comparison of Change Theories. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration. 2005; 8 (1): 1-7.

  16. Cummings S, Bridgman T, Brown KG. Unfreezing change as three steps: rethinking Kurt Lewin's legacy for change management. Human Relations. 2016; 69 (1): 33-60.

  17. Gordon L, Cleland JA. Change is never easy: How management theories can help operationalise change in medical education. Med Educ. 2021; 55 (1): 55-64.

  18. Shipper ES, Miller SE, Hasty BN, De La Cruz MM, Merrell SB, Lin DT, et al. Determining the educational value of a technical and nontechnical skills medical student curriculum. J Surg Res. 2018; 225: 157-165. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.01.002

  19. Gimeno SJ. El curri?culum: una reflexio?n sobre la práctica. 9a ed. Madrid: Ediciones Morata; 2007.

  20. World Health Organization. Patient Safety Curriculum Guide. 2011.

  21. Cheung L. Using the ADDIE Model of Instructional Design to Teach Chest Radiograph Interpretation. J Biomed Educ. 2016; 20: 1-6.

  22. Díaz-Guio DA, Arias-Botero JH, Álvarez C, Gaitán-Buitrago MH, Ricardo-Zapata A, Cárdenas L, et al. Telesimulación en la formación en medicina perioperatoria desde la perspectiva colombiana. Simulación Clínica. 2021; 3 (3): 110-116.

  23. Khamis NN, Satava RM, Alnassar SA, Kern DE. A stepwise model for simulation-based curriculum development for clinical skills, a modification of the six-step approach. Surg Endosc. 2016; 30 (1): 279-287.

  24. Díaz-Guio DA, Vasco M, Ferrero F, Ricardo-Zapata A. Educación basada en simulación, una metodología activa de aprendizaje a través de experiencia y reflexión. Revista Latinoamericana de Simulación Clínica. 2024; 6 (3): 119-126. Disponible en: https://www.medigraphic.com/cgi-bin/new/resumen.cgi?IDARTICULO=118838

  25. Bjerke MB, Renger R. Being smart about writing SMART objectives. Eval Program Plann. 2017; 61: 125-127.

  26. Ausubel D, Novak J, Hanesian L. Psicología educativa: un punto de vista cognoscitivo. México: Editorial Trillas; 1983.

  27. Sakamoto S. Simulation-based training for handling extracorporeal membrane oxygenation emergencies. J Thorac Dis. 2017; 9 (10): 3649-3651.

  28. Barsuk JH, Cohen ER, Vozenilek JA, O'Connor LM, McGaghie WC, Wayne DB. Simulation-based education with mastery learning improves paracentesis skills. J Grad Med Educ. 2012; 4: 23-27. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-11-00161.1. Available in: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3312528/pdf/i1949-8357-4-1-23.pdf

  29. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. A critical review of simulation-based mastery learning with translational outcomes. Med Educ. 2014; 48 (4): 375-385.

  30. Flin R, Patey R, Glavin R, Maran N. Anaesthetists' non-technical skills. Br J Anaesth. 2010; 105 (1): 38-44.

  31. Youngson GG. Teaching and assessing non-technical skills. Surgeon. 2011; 9 (Suppl. 1): S35-37.

  32. Phillips EC, Smith SE, Hamilton AL, Kerins J, Clarke B, Tallentire VR. Assessing medical students' non-technical skills using immersive simulation: What are the essential components? Simul Healthc. 2021; 16 (2): 98-104.

  33. Lateef F. Maximizing learning and creativity: understanding psychological safety in simulation-based learning. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2020; 13 (1): 5-14.

  34. Schmutz JB, Kolbe M, Eppich WJ. Twelve tips for integrating team reflexivity into your simulation-based team training. Med Teach. 2018; 40 (7): 721-727.

  35. Jafari AR, Davatgari AH. Review of constructivism and social constructivism. Journal of Social Sciences, Literature and Languages. 2015; 1 (1): 9-16.

  36. Becerra, G; Castorina A. Acerca de la noción de "marco epistémico" del constructivismo. Una comparación con la noción de "paradigma" de Kuhn. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad. 2016; 11 (31): 9-28.

  37. Kianto A, Sáenz J, Aramburu N. Knowledge-based human resource management practices, intellectual capital and innovation. J Bus Res. 2017; 81: 11-20.

  38. Van Beurden J, Van de Voorde K, Van Veldhoven M, Jiang K. Do managers and employees see eye to eye? A dyadic perspective on high-performance work practices and their impact on performance. J Bus Res. 2025; 190.

  39. Boon C, Den Hartog DN, Lepak DP. A systematic review of human resource management systems and their measurement. J Manage. 2019; 45 (6): 2498-2537.

  40. Hafler JP, Ownby AR, Thompson BM, Fasser CE, Grigsby K, Haidet P, et al. Decoding the learning environment of medical education: A hidden curriculum perspective for faculty development. Acad Med. 2011; 86 (4): 440-444.

  41. Maxworthy JC, Palaganas JC, Epps CA, Mancini ME, editors. Building a Simulation Center: Key Design Strategies and Considerations. In: Maxworthy JC, Palaganas JC, Epps CA, et al. Defining excellence in simulation programs. 2nd ed. Wolters Kluwer Health; 2022.

  42. Tsuda S, Mohsin A, Jones D. Financing a simulation center. Vol. 95, Surgical Clinics of North America. W.B. Saunders; 2015. pp. 791-800.

  43. Van Assen MF. Training, employee involvement and continuous improvement–the moderating effect of a common improvement method. Production Planning and Control. 2021; 32 (2): 132-144.

  44. Rubenstein L, Khodyakov D, Hempel S, Danz M, Salem-Schatz S, Foy R, et al. How can we recognize continuous quality improvement? Int J Qual Health Care. 2014; 26 (1): 6-15.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com