Cargando…

Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation

BACKGROUND: Knowledge acquisition and skill maintenance are important in learning neonatal resuscitation. Traditionally this is taught by using low fidelity mannequins. Technological advancement enabled a move towards high fidelity mannequins. In a low resources setting, it is incumbent to ensure re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nimbalkar, Archana, Patel, Dipen, Kungwani, Amit, Phatak, Ajay, Vasa, Rohitkumar, Nimbalkar, Somashekhar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4630885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26526494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1623-9
_version_ 1782398784383221760
author Nimbalkar, Archana
Patel, Dipen
Kungwani, Amit
Phatak, Ajay
Vasa, Rohitkumar
Nimbalkar, Somashekhar
author_facet Nimbalkar, Archana
Patel, Dipen
Kungwani, Amit
Phatak, Ajay
Vasa, Rohitkumar
Nimbalkar, Somashekhar
author_sort Nimbalkar, Archana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Knowledge acquisition and skill maintenance are important in learning neonatal resuscitation. Traditionally this is taught by using low fidelity mannequins. Technological advancement enabled a move towards high fidelity mannequins. In a low resources setting, it is incumbent to ensure reasonable cost benefit ratio before investing in technology. METHODS: A randomized control trial was conducted in 101 undergraduate students who were assigned to conventional Resusci(®) Baby Basic or SimNewB group over a period of 3 days. The lectures were the same for both groups but the hands on training was on different mannequins. There were five experienced and accredited teachers who were standardized for training the students. Both the groups received a written test and a Megacode before and after the training, and 3 months later a post-test. RESULTS: The baseline written exam score (p = 0.07), Megacode assessment score (p = 0.19) and sex distribution (p = 0.17) were similar in both groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in the written exam score as well as in the Megacode assessment score at post-test and 3 months (retention) period. However there was no significant difference in the “improvement” between both the groups with respect to written exam (p = 0.38) or Megacode assessment (p = 0.92). Further the post-test and 3 month scores were comparable for the skills as well as content components suggesting that the skills were retained in 3 months with an opportunity of self learning them. CONCLUSIONS: Due diligence is a caveat before contemplating the acquisition of high fidelity mannequins by educational centers for neonatal resuscitation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4630885
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46308852015-11-04 Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation Nimbalkar, Archana Patel, Dipen Kungwani, Amit Phatak, Ajay Vasa, Rohitkumar Nimbalkar, Somashekhar BMC Res Notes Research Article BACKGROUND: Knowledge acquisition and skill maintenance are important in learning neonatal resuscitation. Traditionally this is taught by using low fidelity mannequins. Technological advancement enabled a move towards high fidelity mannequins. In a low resources setting, it is incumbent to ensure reasonable cost benefit ratio before investing in technology. METHODS: A randomized control trial was conducted in 101 undergraduate students who were assigned to conventional Resusci(®) Baby Basic or SimNewB group over a period of 3 days. The lectures were the same for both groups but the hands on training was on different mannequins. There were five experienced and accredited teachers who were standardized for training the students. Both the groups received a written test and a Megacode before and after the training, and 3 months later a post-test. RESULTS: The baseline written exam score (p = 0.07), Megacode assessment score (p = 0.19) and sex distribution (p = 0.17) were similar in both groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in the written exam score as well as in the Megacode assessment score at post-test and 3 months (retention) period. However there was no significant difference in the “improvement” between both the groups with respect to written exam (p = 0.38) or Megacode assessment (p = 0.92). Further the post-test and 3 month scores were comparable for the skills as well as content components suggesting that the skills were retained in 3 months with an opportunity of self learning them. CONCLUSIONS: Due diligence is a caveat before contemplating the acquisition of high fidelity mannequins by educational centers for neonatal resuscitation. BioMed Central 2015-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4630885/ /pubmed/26526494 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1623-9 Text en © Nimbalkar et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Nimbalkar, Archana
Patel, Dipen
Kungwani, Amit
Phatak, Ajay
Vasa, Rohitkumar
Nimbalkar, Somashekhar
Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
title Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
title_full Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
title_fullStr Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
title_full_unstemmed Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
title_short Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
title_sort randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4630885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26526494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1623-9
work_keys_str_mv AT nimbalkararchana randomizedcontroltrialofhighfidelityvslowfidelitysimulationfortrainingundergraduatestudentsinneonatalresuscitation
AT pateldipen randomizedcontroltrialofhighfidelityvslowfidelitysimulationfortrainingundergraduatestudentsinneonatalresuscitation
AT kungwaniamit randomizedcontroltrialofhighfidelityvslowfidelitysimulationfortrainingundergraduatestudentsinneonatalresuscitation
AT phatakajay randomizedcontroltrialofhighfidelityvslowfidelitysimulationfortrainingundergraduatestudentsinneonatalresuscitation
AT vasarohitkumar randomizedcontroltrialofhighfidelityvslowfidelitysimulationfortrainingundergraduatestudentsinneonatalresuscitation
AT nimbalkarsomashekhar randomizedcontroltrialofhighfidelityvslowfidelitysimulationfortrainingundergraduatestudentsinneonatalresuscitation