Soares-Brandão CF, Cecilio-Fernandes D, Marin HF

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 89-94
PDF size: 156.61 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Simulation training has been shown to support the integration of students’ knowledge and skills. Although much is known about simulation training in residency programs, little is known about the use of simulation training in undergraduate medical students. Therefore, we investigated students’ knowledge acquisition and retention after a simulation training in cardiovascular emergency. We also investigated the relation between students’ knowledge and the number of cardiovascular treatments on live clinical patients. Material and methods: This observational, longitudinal and quantitative study was conducted at Universidade Cidade São Paulo (UNICID). During their clerkship, students attended the course four times during two years to a clinical simulation training; so that they could apply their knowledge and skills about advanced cardiovascular emergency. After each encounter, students answered a knowledge test. We also recorded student participation in the simulated training and whether they have treated any real life cases. To analyze students’ scores over time, repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used. To compare students who had contact with live clinical patients with those who not, we used t-test. Results: There was an increase in students’ knowledge over time. There was no difference on students’ scores between students who had contact with live clinical patients with those who only had contact with clinical simulation. Conclusion: It seems that simulation training support students’ knowledge acquisition and retention, providing an efficient and realistic training strategy in undergraduate medical schools. Interestingly, there was no difference between scores of students who had attended live clinical patient with those who had not have contact with clinical simulations. Further research should investigate the reason that there was no difference between both groups of students.

REFERENCES

1. Gaba DM. The future vision of simulation in health care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004; 13 Suppl 1: i2-i10.

2. Steadman RH, Burden AR, Huang YM, Gaba DM, Cooper JB. Practice improvements based on participation in simulation for the maintenance of certification in anesthesiology program. Anesthesiology. 2015; 122 (5): 1154-1169.

3. Wolff M, Wagner MJ, Poznanski S, Schiller J, Santen S. Not another boring lecture: Engaging learners with active learning techniques. J Emerg Med. 2015; 48 (1): 85-93.

4. Gaba DM. Do as we say, not as you do: Using simulation to investigate clinical behavior in action. Simul Healthc. 2009; 4 (2): 67-69.

5. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Hart IR, et al. Simulation technology for health care professional skills training and assessment. JAMA. 1999; 282 (9): 861-866.

6. Fuszard B. Innovative teaching strategies in nursing. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers; 1995.

7. Scherer YK, Bruce SA, Graves BT, Erdley WS. Acute care nurse practitioner education enhancing performance through the use of clinical simulation. AACN A Adv Crit Care. 2003; 14 (3): 331-341.

8. Spunt D, Shpritz D. Clinical laboratory course development and management. In: Jairath N, Mills ME. Online health science education. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams e Wilkins; 2006.

9. Aebersold M, Tschannen D, Bathish M. Innovative simulation strategies in education. Nurs Res Pract. 2012; 2012: 1-7. doi: 10.1155/2012/765212.

10. Coolen EH, Draaisma JM, Hogeveen M, Antonius TA, Lommen CM, Loeffen JL. Effectiveness of high fidelity video-assisted real-time simulation: a comparison of three training methods for acute pediatric emergencies. Int J Pediatr. 2012; 2012: 1-8.

11. Smith CM, Perkins GD, Bullock I, Bion JF. Undergraduate training in the care of the acutely ill patient: a literature review. Intensive Care Med. 2007; 33 (5): 901-907.

12. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011; 306 (9): 978-988.

13. Boet S, Borges B, Naik V, et al. Complex procedural skills are retained for a minimum of 1 yr after a single high-fidelity simulation training session. Br J Anaesth. 2011; 107 (4): 533-539.

14. Cecilio-Fernandes D, Brandão CFS, de Oliveira DLC, Fernandes GCVR, Tio RA. Additional simulation training: does it affect students’ knowledge acquisition and retention? BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn. 2019; 5: 140-143.

15. Yeh DD, Park YS. Improving learning efficiency of factual knowledge in medical education. J Surg Educ. 2015; 72 (5): 882-889.

16. Cecilio-Fernandes D, Cnossen F, Jaarsma DA, Tio RA. Avoiding surgical skill decay: a systematic review on the spacing of training sessions. J Surg Educ. 2018; 75 (2): 471-480.

17. Fitch MT. Using high-fidelity emergency simulation with large groups of preclinical medical students in a basic science course. Med Teach. 2007; 29 (2-3): 261-263.

18. Heitz C, Brown A, Johnson JE, Fitch MT. Large group high-fidelity simulation enhances medical student learning. Med Teach. 2009; 31 (5): e206-e210.

19. Euliano TY. Small group teaching: clinical correlation with a human patient simulator. Adv Physiol Educ. 2001; 25 (1): 36-43.

20. Nogueira LS, Wilson AMMM, Karakhanian ACM, Parreira EV, Machado VMP, Mira VL. Avaliação dos conhecimentos e habilidades em ressuscitação cardiopulmonar assimilados por profissionais da atenção primária em saúde. Sci Med. 2018; 28 (1): ID28843. http://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2018.1.28843.

21. Brandão CFS, de Carvalho-Filho MA, Cecilio-Fernandes D. Simulation centers and pedagogical planning: two sides of the same coin. Sci Med. 2018; 28: ID28709. http://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2018.1.28709.

22. Brandão CFS, Fernandes DC. Importance and challenges of simulation training in healthcare. Sci Med. 2018; 28: ID30102. http://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2018.1.30102.