Cargando…

A randomized comparison of video demonstration versus hands-on training of medical students for vacuum delivery using Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS)

BACKGROUND: To compare medical students’ skills for vaginal operative delivery by vacuum extraction (VE) after hands-on training versus video demonstration. METHODS: We randomized medical students to an expert demonstration (group 1) or a hands-on (group 2) training using a standardized VE algorithm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hilal, Ziad, Kumpernatz, Anne K., Rezniczek, Günther A., Cetin, Cem, Tempfer-Bentz, Eva-Katrin, Tempfer, Clemens B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5369926/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28296771
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000006355
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To compare medical students’ skills for vaginal operative delivery by vacuum extraction (VE) after hands-on training versus video demonstration. METHODS: We randomized medical students to an expert demonstration (group 1) or a hands-on (group 2) training using a standardized VE algorithm on a pelvic training model. Students were tested with a 40-item Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) scoring system after training and 4 days later. OSATS scores were the primary outcome. Performance time, self-assessment, confidence, and global rating scale were secondary outcomes. We assessed the constructive validity of OSATS in this VE model comparing metric scores of experts and students. RESULTS: In all, 137 students were randomized. OSATS scores were higher in group 2 (n = 63) compared with group 1 (n = 74) (32.89 ± 6.39 vs 27.51 ± 10.27, respectively; P < 0.0001). Global rating scale (1.49 ± 0.76 vs 2.33 ± 0.94, respectively; P < 0.0001), confidence (2.22 ± 0.75 vs 3.26 ± 0.94, respectively; P = 0.04), self-assessment (2.03 ± 0.62 vs 2.51 ± 0.77, respectively; P < 0.0001), and performance time (38.81 ± 11.58 seconds vs 47.23 ± 17.35 seconds, respectively; P = 0.001) also favored group 2. After 4 days, this effect persisted with OSATS scores still being significantly higher in group 2 (30.00 ± 6.50 vs 25.59 ± 6.09, respectively; P = 0.001). The assessed OSATS scores showed constructive validity. In a multiple linear regression analysis, group assignment independently influenced OSATS scores, whereas sex, handedness, sports activities, and type of curriculum were not independently associated with OSATS scores. CONCLUSIONS: Hands-on training is superior to video demonstration for teaching VE on a pelvic model.