Cargando…

High and low-fidelity simulation for respiratory diseases pediatric training: a prospective and randomized study()

OBJECTIVE: To compare high and low-fidelity simulations for the recognition of respiratory distress and failure in urgency and emergency pediatric scenarios. METHODS: 70 fourth-year medical students were randomly distributed in high and low-fidelity groups and simulated different types of respirator...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Valente, Beatriz Cristina Heitmann Gomes, Melo, Maria do Carmo Barros de, Liu, Priscila Menezes Ferri, Gonçalves, Beatriz Adriane Rodrigues, Gomes, Romina Aparecida dos Santos, Martins, Isadora Guimarães, Oliveira, Ana Clara Pereira Lage de, Ferreira, Ana Luísa de Cássia Magalhães, Bothrel, Rafaella Garcia, de Lima Belizário Facury Lasmar, Laura Maria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10492141/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37244290
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jped.2023.04.007
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To compare high and low-fidelity simulations for the recognition of respiratory distress and failure in urgency and emergency pediatric scenarios. METHODS: 70 fourth-year medical students were randomly distributed in high and low-fidelity groups and simulated different types of respiratory problems. Theory tests, performance checklists, and satisfaction and self-confidence questionnaires were used in the assessment. Face-to-face simulation and memory retention was applied. The statistics were evaluated by averages and quartiles, Kappa, and generalized estimating equations. The p-value was considered 0.05. RESULTS: In the theory test there was an increase in scores in both methodologies (p < 0.001); in memory retention (p = 0.043) and at the end of the process the high-fidelity group had better results. The performance in the practical checklists was better after the second simulation (p > 0,05). The high-fidelity group felt more challenged in both phases (p = 0.042; p = 0.018) and showed greater self-confidence to recognize changes in clinical conditions and in memory retention (p = 0.050). The same group, in relation to the hypothetical real patient to be treated in the future, felt better confident to recognize respiratory distress and failure (p = 0.008; p = 0.004), and better prepared to make a systematic clinical evaluation of the patient in memory retention (p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: The two levels of simulations enhance diagnostic skills. High fidelity improves knowledge, leads the student to feel more challenged and more self-confident in recognizing the severity of the clinical case, including memory retention, and showed benefits regarding self-confidence in recognizing respiratory distress and failure in pediatric cases.