Cargando…

“Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills

BACKGROUND: Benefits of skills lab training are widely accepted, but there is sparse research on its long-term effectiveness. We therefore conducted a prospective, randomised controlled-trial to investigate whether in a simulated setting students trained according to a "best practice" mode...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Herrmann-Werner, Anne, Nikendei, Christoph, Keifenheim, Katharina, Bosse, Hans Martin, Lund, Frederike, Wagner, Robert, Celebi, Nora, Zipfel, Stephan, Weyrich, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3783438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24086732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076354
_version_ 1782285665357004800
author Herrmann-Werner, Anne
Nikendei, Christoph
Keifenheim, Katharina
Bosse, Hans Martin
Lund, Frederike
Wagner, Robert
Celebi, Nora
Zipfel, Stephan
Weyrich, Peter
author_facet Herrmann-Werner, Anne
Nikendei, Christoph
Keifenheim, Katharina
Bosse, Hans Martin
Lund, Frederike
Wagner, Robert
Celebi, Nora
Zipfel, Stephan
Weyrich, Peter
author_sort Herrmann-Werner, Anne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Benefits of skills lab training are widely accepted, but there is sparse research on its long-term effectiveness. We therefore conducted a prospective, randomised controlled-trial to investigate whether in a simulated setting students trained according to a "best practice" model (BPSL) perform two skills of different complexity (nasogastral tube insertion, NGT; intravenous cannulation, IVC) better than students trained with a traditional "see one, do one" teaching approach (TRAD), at follow-up of 3 or 6 months. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 94 first-year medical students were randomly assigned to one of four groups: BPSL training or TRAD teaching with follow-up at 3 (3M) or 6 (6M) months. BPSL included structured feedback, practice on manikins, and Peyton’s "Four-Step-Approach", while TRAD was only based on the "see one - do one" principle. At follow-up, manikins were used to assess students’ performance by two independent blinded video-assessors using binary checklists and a single-item global assessment scale. BPSL students scored significantly higher immediately after training (NGT: BPSL3M 94.8%±0.2 and BPSL6M 95.4%±0.3 percentage of maximal score ± SEM; TRAD3M 86.1%±0.5 and TRAD6M 84.7%±0.4. IVC: BPSL3M 86.4%±0.5 and BPSL6M 88.0%±0.5; TRAD3M 73.2%±0.7 and TRAD6M 72.5%±0.7) and lost significantly less of their performance ability at each follow-up (NGT: BPSL3M 86.3%±0.3 and TRAD3M 70.3%±0.6; BPSL6M 89.0%±0.3 and TRAD6M 65.4%±0.6; IVC: BPSL3M 79.5%±0.5 and TRAD3M 56.5%±0.5; BPSL6M 73.2%±0.4 and TRAD6M 51.5%±0.8). In addition, BPSL students were more often rated clinically competent at all assessment times. The superiority at assessment after training was higher for the more complex skill (IVC), whereas NGT with its lower complexity profited more with regard to long-term retention. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that within a simulated setting BPSL is significantly more effective than TRAD for skills of different complexity assessed immediately after training and at follow-up. The advantages of BPSL training are seen especially in long-term retention.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3783438
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37834382013-10-01 “Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills Herrmann-Werner, Anne Nikendei, Christoph Keifenheim, Katharina Bosse, Hans Martin Lund, Frederike Wagner, Robert Celebi, Nora Zipfel, Stephan Weyrich, Peter PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Benefits of skills lab training are widely accepted, but there is sparse research on its long-term effectiveness. We therefore conducted a prospective, randomised controlled-trial to investigate whether in a simulated setting students trained according to a "best practice" model (BPSL) perform two skills of different complexity (nasogastral tube insertion, NGT; intravenous cannulation, IVC) better than students trained with a traditional "see one, do one" teaching approach (TRAD), at follow-up of 3 or 6 months. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 94 first-year medical students were randomly assigned to one of four groups: BPSL training or TRAD teaching with follow-up at 3 (3M) or 6 (6M) months. BPSL included structured feedback, practice on manikins, and Peyton’s "Four-Step-Approach", while TRAD was only based on the "see one - do one" principle. At follow-up, manikins were used to assess students’ performance by two independent blinded video-assessors using binary checklists and a single-item global assessment scale. BPSL students scored significantly higher immediately after training (NGT: BPSL3M 94.8%±0.2 and BPSL6M 95.4%±0.3 percentage of maximal score ± SEM; TRAD3M 86.1%±0.5 and TRAD6M 84.7%±0.4. IVC: BPSL3M 86.4%±0.5 and BPSL6M 88.0%±0.5; TRAD3M 73.2%±0.7 and TRAD6M 72.5%±0.7) and lost significantly less of their performance ability at each follow-up (NGT: BPSL3M 86.3%±0.3 and TRAD3M 70.3%±0.6; BPSL6M 89.0%±0.3 and TRAD6M 65.4%±0.6; IVC: BPSL3M 79.5%±0.5 and TRAD3M 56.5%±0.5; BPSL6M 73.2%±0.4 and TRAD6M 51.5%±0.8). In addition, BPSL students were more often rated clinically competent at all assessment times. The superiority at assessment after training was higher for the more complex skill (IVC), whereas NGT with its lower complexity profited more with regard to long-term retention. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that within a simulated setting BPSL is significantly more effective than TRAD for skills of different complexity assessed immediately after training and at follow-up. The advantages of BPSL training are seen especially in long-term retention. Public Library of Science 2013-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3783438/ /pubmed/24086732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076354 Text en © 2013 Werner et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Herrmann-Werner, Anne
Nikendei, Christoph
Keifenheim, Katharina
Bosse, Hans Martin
Lund, Frederike
Wagner, Robert
Celebi, Nora
Zipfel, Stephan
Weyrich, Peter
“Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills
title “Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills
title_full “Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills
title_fullStr “Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills
title_full_unstemmed “Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills
title_short “Best Practice” Skills Lab Training vs. a “see one, do one” Approach in Undergraduate Medical Education: An RCT on Students’ Long-Term Ability to Perform Procedural Clinical Skills
title_sort “best practice” skills lab training vs. a “see one, do one” approach in undergraduate medical education: an rct on students’ long-term ability to perform procedural clinical skills
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3783438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24086732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076354
work_keys_str_mv AT herrmannwerneranne bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT nikendeichristoph bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT keifenheimkatharina bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT bossehansmartin bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT lundfrederike bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT wagnerrobert bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT celebinora bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT zipfelstephan bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills
AT weyrichpeter bestpracticeskillslabtrainingvsaseeonedooneapproachinundergraduatemedicaleducationanrctonstudentslongtermabilitytoperformproceduralclinicalskills