Dataset Information

Long-term retention assessment after simulation-based-training of pediatric procedural skills among adult emergency physicians: a multicenter observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

One of the primary goals of simulation-based education is to enable long-term retention of training gains. However, medical literature has poorly contributed to understanding the best timing for repetition of simulation sessions. There is heterogeneity in re-training recommendations.

Objectives

This study assessed, through simulation-based training in different groups, the long-term retention of rare pediatric technical procedures.

Methods

This multicenter observational study included 107 emergency physicians and residents. Eighty-eight were divided into four groups that were specifically trained for pediatric emergency procedures at different points in time between 2010 and 2015 (< 0.5 year prior for G1, between 0.5 and 2 years prior for G2, between 2 and 4 years prior for G3, and ≥ 4 years prior for G4). An untrained control group (C) included 19 emergency physicians. Participants were asked to manage an unconscious infant using a low-fidelity mannequin. Assessment was based on the performance at 6 specific tasks corresponding to airway (A) and ventilation (B) skills. The performance (scored on 100) was evaluated by the TAPAS scale (Team Average Performance Assessment Scale). Correlation between performance and clinical level of experience was studied.

Results

There was a significant difference in performance between groups (p < 0.0001). For G1, 89% of the expected tasks were completed but resulted in longer delays before initiating actions than for the other groups. There was no difference between G4 and C with less than half of the tasks performed (47 and 43% respectively, p = 0.57). There was no correlation between clinical level of experience and performance (p = 0.39).

Conclusion

Performance decreased at 6 months after specific training for pediatric emergency skills, with total loss at 4 years after training, irrespective of experience. Repetition of simulation sessions should be implemented frequently after training to improve long-term retention and the optimal rate of refresher courses requires further research.

SUBMITTER: Ansquer R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6739955 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveWhile short-term gains in performance of critical emergency procedures are demonstrated after simulation, long-term retention is relatively uncertain. Our objective was to determine whether simulation of critical emergency procedures promotes long-term retention of skills in nonsurgical physicians.MethodsWe searched multiple electronic databases using a peer-reviewed strategy. Eligible studies 1) were observational cohorts, quasi-experimental or randomized controlled trials; 2) assessed intubation, cricothyrotomy, pericardiocentesis, tube thoracostomy, or central line placement performance by nonsurgical physicians; 3) utilized any form of simulation; and 4) assessed skill performance immediately after and at ≥ 3 months after simulation. The primary outcome was skill performance at or above a preset performance benchmark at ≥ 3 months after simulation. Secondary outcomes included procedural skill performance at 3, 6, and ≥ 12 months after simulation.ResultsWe identified 1,712 citations, with 10 being eligible for inclusion. Methodologic quality was moderate with undefined primary outcomes; inadequate sample sizes; and use of nonstandardized, unvalidated tools. Three studies assessed performance to a specific performance benchmark. Two demonstrated maintenance of the minimum performance benchmark while two demonstrated significant skill decay. A significant decline in the mean performance scores from immediately after simulation to 3, 6, and ≥ 12 months after simulation was observed in four of four, three of four, and two of five studies, respectively. Scores remained significantly above baseline at 3, 6, and ≥ 12 months after simulation in three of four, three of four, and four of four studies, respectively.ConclusionThere were a limited number of studies examining the retention of critical skills after simulation training. While there was some evidence of skill retention after simulation, overall most studies demonstrated skill decline over time.

Project description:Background:In a setting in which learning of basic procedural skills commences upon graduation from medical school, and as a first step towards integration of simulation-based learning into the anesthesiology training program, a preparatory course for new anesthesia trainees was designed. Three educational strategies were sequentially combined (e-learning, simulation-based hands on workshops, and on-site observational learning), and performance was assessed in a stepwise approach on five procedural skills considered essential for early anesthetic management (peripheral intravenous cannulation, sterile hand wash and gowning, anesthesia workstation preparation, face-mask ventilation, and orotracheal intubation). The primary aim of this study was to determine if this preparatory training course at the onset of anesthesiology residency is useful to achieve a competent trainee performance in the clinical setting. Methods:This prospective study was carried out at a university-affiliated hospital in Buenos Aires, Argentina, from 2017 to 2019. The 24 participants, comprising three cohorts of 8 residents each, underwent a preparatory course at the onset of residency. Diverse, consecutive educational strategies, and assessments (three stages: 1, 2, 3) took place using task-specific tools (checklists) and global rating scales for five procedural skills. The primary outcome was achievement of competent scores (85%) in final assessments, and the secondary outcomes were performance improvement between assessment stages and compliance with predefined safety items. Results:Twenty trainees (83.3%) were found to be globally competent (both assessment tools for all procedures) during final assessments (stage 3). Statistically significant improvement was found for all procedural skills between baseline and after workshop assessment scores (stages 1-2), except for orotracheal intubation in checklists, and for all procedural skills between stages 2 and 3 except for sterile hand wash and gowning in checklists. Conclusions:In our single-center experience, the gap for competent trainee performance in essential early anesthetic management skills can be effectively covered by conducting an intensive, preparatory course using the combination of three educational strategies (e-learning, simulation-based hands on workshops, and observational learning) at the onset of residency. This course has allowed learning to be generated in a secure environment for both patients and trainees.

Project description:ObjectivesHospitalists are expected to be competent in performing bedside procedures, which are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A national decline in procedures performed by hospitalists has prompted questions about their procedural competency. Additionally, though simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) has been shown to be effective among trainees whether this approach has enduring benefits for independent practitioners who already have experience is unknown. We aimed to assess the baseline procedural skill of hospitalists already credentialed to perform procedures. We hypothesised that simulation-based training of hospitalists would result in durable skill gains after several months.DesignProspective cohort study with pretraining and post-training measurements.SettingSingle, large, urban academic medical centre in the USA.ParticipantsTwenty-two out of 38 eligible participants defined as hospitalists working on teaching services where they would supervise trainees performing procedures.InterventionsOne-on-one, 60 min SBML of lumbar puncture (LP) and abdominal paracentesis (AP).Primary and secondary outcome measuresOur primary outcome was the percentage of hospitalists obtaining minimum passing scores (MPS) on LP and AP checklists; our secondary outcomes were average checklist scores and self-reported confidence.ResultsAt baseline, only 16% hospitalists met or exceeded the MPS for LP and 32% for AP. Immediately after SBML, 100% of hospitalists reached this threshold. Reassessment an average of 7 months later revealed that only 40% of hospitalists achieved the MPS. Confidence increased initially after training but declined over time.ConclusionsHospitalists may be performing invasive bedside procedures without demonstration of adequate skill. A single evidence-based training intervention was insufficient to sustain skills for the majority of hospitalists over a short period of time. More stringent practices for certifying hospitalists who perform risky procedures are warranted, as well as mechanisms to support skill maintenance, such as periodic simulation-based training and assessment.

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate how anaesthesiologists manage a "cannot intubate, can ventilate" (CI) and "cannot intubate, cannot ventilate" (CICV) scenarios, and how following simulation training will affect their guideline adherence, skills and decision-making immediately after training and 6 months later.MethodsA prospective controlled study was conducted from July to December 2022. Anaesthesiologists who applied for the continuous medical education course "Difficult Airway Management" were involved in the study. Each volunteer participated in two simulation scenarios (CI, CICV) with structural debriefing after each scenario. After the first simulation round, volunteers were trained in difficult airway management according to DAS guidelines, using the same equipment as during the simulation. The participants repeated the simulation scenarios the day after the training and six months later. The primary and secondary endpoints were compared between three rounds: initial simulation (Group 1), immediately after training (Group 2), and six months after training (Group 3).ResultsA total of 24 anaesthesiologists consented to participate in the study and completed the initial survey form. During the first session, 83.3% of participants had at least one major deviation from the DAS protocol. During the first CICV scenario, 79% of participants made at least one deviation from the DAS protocol. The second time after simulation training, significantly better results were achieved: the number of anaesthesiologists, who attempted more than 3 laryngoscopies decreased (OR = 7 [1.8-26.8], p = 0.006 right after training and OR = 3.9 [1.06-14.4], p = 0.035 6 month later); the number, who skipped the supralaryngeal device attempt, call for help and failure to initiate surgical airway also decreased. Simulation training also significantly decreases the time to call for help, cricothyroidotomy initiation time, and mean desaturation time and increases the odds ratio of successful cricothyroidotomy (OR 0.02 [0.003-0.14], p < 0.0001 right after training and OR = OR 0.02 [0.003-0.16] 6 months after training).ConclusionsAnaesthesiologists usually display major deviations from DAS guidelines while managing CI and CICV scenarios. Simulation training improves their guideline adherence, skills, and decision-making when repeating the simulation immediately after training and 6 months later.Study registrationNCT05913492, clinicaltrials.gov, 22/06/2023.