Cargando…

More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”

Background: Fidelity in simulation is an important design feature. Although it is typically seen as bipolar (i.e., “high” or “low”), fidelity is actually multidimensional. There are concerns that “low fidelity” might impede the immersion of learners during simulation training. “Locally built models”...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sao Pedro, Tais, Mtaweh, Haifa, Mema, Briseida
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Thoracic Society 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8043267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33870328
http://dx.doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2020-0040IN
_version_ 1783678269182181376
author Sao Pedro, Tais
Mtaweh, Haifa
Mema, Briseida
author_facet Sao Pedro, Tais
Mtaweh, Haifa
Mema, Briseida
author_sort Sao Pedro, Tais
collection PubMed
description Background: Fidelity in simulation is an important design feature. Although it is typically seen as bipolar (i.e., “high” or “low”), fidelity is actually multidimensional. There are concerns that “low fidelity” might impede the immersion of learners during simulation training. “Locally built models” are characterized by decreased cost and reduced “structural” fidelity (how the simulator looks) while satisfying “functional” fidelity (what the simulator does). Objective: To 1) describe the use of a locally built chest tube model in building a mastery-based simulation curriculum and 2) describe evaluation of the model from learners in different stages and contexts. Methods: The model was built on the basis of key functional features of the assigned training task. A curriculum that combined progressive difficulty and opportunities for deliberate practice and mastery was developed. An analysis of the learner’s survey responses was performed using SAS studio (SAS Software). Results: We describe the process of creating the chest tube model and a curriculum in which the model is used for increasing levels of difficulty to reach skill mastery. Learners at different stages and in different contexts, such as practicing physicians and trainees from developed and developing countries, evaluated the model similarly. We provide validity evidence for the content, response process, and relationship with other variables when using the model in the assessment of chest tube insertion skills. Conclusion: As demonstrated in our chest tube critical care medicine curriculum, the locally built models are simple to build and feasible to use. Contrary to current thinking that low-fidelity models might impede immersion in simulation training for experienced learners, the survey results show that different learners provide very similar evaluations after practicing with the model.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8043267
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher American Thoracic Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80432672021-04-16 More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model” Sao Pedro, Tais Mtaweh, Haifa Mema, Briseida ATS Sch Innovations Background: Fidelity in simulation is an important design feature. Although it is typically seen as bipolar (i.e., “high” or “low”), fidelity is actually multidimensional. There are concerns that “low fidelity” might impede the immersion of learners during simulation training. “Locally built models” are characterized by decreased cost and reduced “structural” fidelity (how the simulator looks) while satisfying “functional” fidelity (what the simulator does). Objective: To 1) describe the use of a locally built chest tube model in building a mastery-based simulation curriculum and 2) describe evaluation of the model from learners in different stages and contexts. Methods: The model was built on the basis of key functional features of the assigned training task. A curriculum that combined progressive difficulty and opportunities for deliberate practice and mastery was developed. An analysis of the learner’s survey responses was performed using SAS studio (SAS Software). Results: We describe the process of creating the chest tube model and a curriculum in which the model is used for increasing levels of difficulty to reach skill mastery. Learners at different stages and in different contexts, such as practicing physicians and trainees from developed and developing countries, evaluated the model similarly. We provide validity evidence for the content, response process, and relationship with other variables when using the model in the assessment of chest tube insertion skills. Conclusion: As demonstrated in our chest tube critical care medicine curriculum, the locally built models are simple to build and feasible to use. Contrary to current thinking that low-fidelity models might impede immersion in simulation training for experienced learners, the survey results show that different learners provide very similar evaluations after practicing with the model. American Thoracic Society 2020-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8043267/ /pubmed/33870328 http://dx.doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2020-0040IN Text en Copyright © 2021 by the American Thoracic Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). For commercial usage and reprints, please contact Diane Gern (dgern@thoracic.org).
spellingShingle Innovations
Sao Pedro, Tais
Mtaweh, Haifa
Mema, Briseida
More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”
title More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”
title_full More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”
title_fullStr More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”
title_full_unstemmed More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”
title_short More Is Not Always Better in Simulation. Learners’ Evaluation of a “Chest Model”
title_sort more is not always better in simulation. learners’ evaluation of a “chest model”
topic Innovations
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8043267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33870328
http://dx.doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2020-0040IN
work_keys_str_mv AT saopedrotais moreisnotalwaysbetterinsimulationlearnersevaluationofachestmodel
AT mtawehhaifa moreisnotalwaysbetterinsimulationlearnersevaluationofachestmodel
AT memabriseida moreisnotalwaysbetterinsimulationlearnersevaluationofachestmodel