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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tan, Ting Xu, Buchanan, Paula, Quattromani, Erin
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