Simulation-Based Medical Education Improves Procedural Confidence in Core Invasive Procedures for Military Internal Medicine Residents

Introduction The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) requires that trainees receive procedural training for certification; however, Internal Medicine (IM) residents perform a variable number of procedures throughout residency training. This results in differences in confidence levels as well as procedural competence. For active-duty military trainees, this is especially problematic, as these procedural skills are often required during deployment soon after residency graduation. This deficit can be improved through standardized simulation-based training. Methods All internal medicine residents at our institution were invited to participate in a standardized simulation-based training program for core internal medicine procedures (lumbar puncture, arterial line, central line, thoracentesis, paracentesis, and arthrocentesis). Residents were asked to qualitatively rate their perceived procedural confidence using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all confident) to 5 (extremely confident) in their ability to independently perform core internal medicine procedures prior to the simulation exercise. Experienced senior residents and internal medicine faculty instructed and supervised each resident as they performed the procedures. Following the simulation exercise, the residents repeated the survey and were asked to report whether or not they found the exercise useful. Results Of the 96 residents invited to participate, 49 completed the pre-simulation questionnaire and 36 completed the post-simulation questionnaire. The cumulative mean Likert scale confidence rating for all procedures showed a statistically significant improvement post-simulation as compared to pre-simulation, including lumbar puncture (2.45±1.1 vs. 3.42±0.87, p<0.05), arterial line (2.48±1.06 vs. 3.39±1.04, p < 0.05), central line (2.86±1.08 vs. 3.5±1.02, p < 0.05), thoracentesis (2.67±1.10 vs. 3.64±0.83, p < 0.05), paracentesis (3.1±1.08 vs. 3.82±0.74, p < 0.05), and arthrocentesis (2.56±1.07 vs. 3.67±0.80, p < 0.05). All (36/36) trainees reported that they perceived the simulation exercise as valuable. Conclusion Internal medicine residents across all post-graduate year (PGY) levels at our institution lacked confidence to independently perform core internal medicine procedures. Utilizing simulation-based medical education as an adjunct to clinical training is well accepted by internal medicine trainees, and resulted in significantly improved procedural confidence. This intervention was well received by trainees and could feasibly be replicated at other active-duty military internal medicine residency programs to assist with readiness. Research is currently in progress to correlate in-situ competency and evaluate clinical outcomes of this improved confidence.