Cargando…
Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model?
OBJECTIVE: To compare simulation task trainers (sim) with cadaver for teaching chest tube insertion to junior residents. METHODS: Prospective study involving postgraduate year (PGY) one and two emergency medicine (EM) and PGY-1 surgery residents. Residents were randomized into sim or cadaver groups...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6081584/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30140461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9179042 |
_version_ | 1783345678973403136 |
---|---|
author | Tan, Ting Xu Buchanan, Paula Quattromani, Erin |
author_facet | Tan, Ting Xu Buchanan, Paula Quattromani, Erin |
author_sort | Tan, Ting Xu |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare simulation task trainers (sim) with cadaver for teaching chest tube insertion to junior residents. METHODS: Prospective study involving postgraduate year (PGY) one and two emergency medicine (EM) and PGY-1 surgery residents. Residents were randomized into sim or cadaver groups based on prior experience and trained using deliberate practice. Primary outcomes were confidence in placing a chest tube and ability to place a chest tube in a clinical setting during a seven-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include skill retention, using an objective assessment checklist of 15 critical steps in chest tube placement, and confidence after seven months. RESULTS: Sixteen residents were randomized to cadaver (n=8) and simulation (n=8) groups. Both groups posttraining had statistically significant increase in confidence. No significant difference existed between groups for median posttraining assessment scores (13.5 sim v 15 cadaver). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for confidence at any point measured. There was moderate correlation (0.58) between number of clinical attempts reported in a seven-month follow-up period and final assessment score. CONCLUSION: Both sim and cadaver models are effective modalities for teaching chest tube placement. Medical education programs can use either modalities to train learners without notable differences in confidence. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6081584 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60815842018-08-23 Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? Tan, Ting Xu Buchanan, Paula Quattromani, Erin Emerg Med Int Research Article OBJECTIVE: To compare simulation task trainers (sim) with cadaver for teaching chest tube insertion to junior residents. METHODS: Prospective study involving postgraduate year (PGY) one and two emergency medicine (EM) and PGY-1 surgery residents. Residents were randomized into sim or cadaver groups based on prior experience and trained using deliberate practice. Primary outcomes were confidence in placing a chest tube and ability to place a chest tube in a clinical setting during a seven-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include skill retention, using an objective assessment checklist of 15 critical steps in chest tube placement, and confidence after seven months. RESULTS: Sixteen residents were randomized to cadaver (n=8) and simulation (n=8) groups. Both groups posttraining had statistically significant increase in confidence. No significant difference existed between groups for median posttraining assessment scores (13.5 sim v 15 cadaver). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for confidence at any point measured. There was moderate correlation (0.58) between number of clinical attempts reported in a seven-month follow-up period and final assessment score. CONCLUSION: Both sim and cadaver models are effective modalities for teaching chest tube placement. Medical education programs can use either modalities to train learners without notable differences in confidence. Hindawi 2018-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6081584/ /pubmed/30140461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9179042 Text en Copyright © 2018 Ting Xu Tan et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Tan, Ting Xu Buchanan, Paula Quattromani, Erin Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
title | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
title_full | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
title_fullStr | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
title_full_unstemmed | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
title_short | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
title_sort | teaching residents chest tubes: simulation task trainer or cadaver model? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6081584/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30140461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9179042 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tantingxu teachingresidentschesttubessimulationtasktrainerorcadavermodel AT buchananpaula teachingresidentschesttubessimulationtasktrainerorcadavermodel AT quattromanierin teachingresidentschesttubessimulationtasktrainerorcadavermodel |