Dataset Information

A randomised trial of the effectiveness of instructor versus automated manikin feedback for training junior doctors in life support skills.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Australian Standards require that clinicians undergo regular training in skills required to respond to the acute deterioration of a patient. Training focuses on the ability to appropriately respond to cardiac arrest, including delivering cardiac compressions, ventilation and appropriate defibrillation. Providing such training comes at a significant cost to the organisation and impacts on clinician time in direct patient care. If effective, the use of an automated manikin could significantly reduce costs and provide consistent training experiences.

Methods

Fifty-six resident medical officers were randomised to two groups to test two skills components of hospital life support training under two feedback conditions. The skills components were cardiac compressions and bag-valve-mask ventilation. The feedback conditions were automated feedback delivered by a simulation manikin and traditional feedback delivered by an instructor. All participants were exposed to both skills components and both feedback conditions in a counterbalanced block design. Participants completed surveys before and after training.

Results

The results demonstrated significantly better performance in cardiac compressions under the automated manikin feedback condition compared with the instructor feedback condition. This difference was not observed in bag-valve-mask ventilation. The majority of participants found the automated manikin feedback more useful than the instructor feedback.

Discussion

Automated manikin feedback was not inferior to instructor feedback for skill acquisition in cardiac compressions training. The automated feedback condition did not achieve the same level of significance in bag-valve-mask ventilation training. Results suggest training with automated feedback presents a cost-effective opportunity to lessen the training burden, whilst improving skill acquisition.

SUBMITTER: Wilson C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7952489 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Standardized patients are widely used in training of medical students, both in teaching and assessment. They also frequently lead complete training sessions delivering physical examination skills without the aid of faculty teaching staff-acting as "patient instructors" (PIs). An important part of this training is their ability to provide detailed structured feedback to students which has a strong impact on their learning success. Yet, to date no study has assessed the quality of physical examination related feedback by PIs. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled study comparing feedback of PIs and faculty staff following a physical examination assessed by students and video assessors.14 PIs and 14 different faculty staff physicians both delivered feedback to 40 medical students that had performed a physical examination on the respective PI while the physicians observed the performance. The physical examination was rated by two independent video assessors to provide an objective performance standard (gold standard). Feedback of PI and physicians was content analyzed by two different independent video assessors based on a provided checklist and compared to the performance standard. Feedback of PIs and physicians was also rated by medical students and video assessors using a questionnaire consisting of 12 items.There was no statistical significant difference concerning overall matching of physician or PI feedback with gold standard ratings by video assessment (p = .219). There was also no statistical difference when focusing only on items that were classified as major key steps (p = .802), mistakes or parts that were left out during physical examination (p = .219) or mistakes in communication items (p = .517). The feedback of physicians was significantly better rated than PI feedback both by students (p = .043) as well as by video assessors (p = .034).In summary, our study demonstrates that trained PIs are able to provide feedback of equal quantitative value to that of faculty staff physicians with regard to a physical examination performed on them. However, both the students and the video raters judged the quality of the feedback given by the physicians to be significantly better than that of the PIs.

Project description:BackgroundSierra Leone is pursuing multiple initiatives to establish in-country postgraduate medical education (PGME), as part of national efforts to strengthen the health workforce. This paper explored the career preferences of junior doctors in Sierra Leone; and the potential benefits and challenges with regards to the development of PGME locally.MethodsJunior doctors (n = 15) who had graduated from the only medical school in Sierra Leone were purposively sampled based on maximum variation (e.g. men/women, years of graduation). In-depth interviews were conducted in October 2013, and digital diaries and two follow-up interviews were used to explore their evolving career aspirations until November 2016. Additionally, 16 semi-structured interviews with key informants were held to gather perspectives on the development of PGME locally. Results were thematically analysed.ResultsAll junior doctors interviewed intended to pursue PGME with the majority wanting primarily a clinical career. Half were interested in also gaining a public health qualification. Major factors influencing career preferences included: prior exposure, practical (anticipated job content), personal considerations (individual interests), financial provision, and contextual (aspirations to help address certain health needs). Majority of doctors considered West Africa but East and South Africa were also location options for clinical PGME. Several preferred to leave the African continent to pursue PGME. Factors influencing decision-making on location were: financial (scholarships), practical (availability of preferred specialty), reputation (positive and negative), and social (children). Key informants viewed the potential benefits of expanding PGME in Sierra Leone as: cost-effectiveness (compared to overseas specialist training), maintaining service delivery during training years, decreasing loss of doctors (some decide not to return after gaining their specialist degree abroad), and enhancing quality control and academic culture of the local medical school. Major perceived challenges were capacity constraints, especially the dearth of specialists required to achieve training programme accreditation.ConclusionsThis study has provided an insight into the career preferences of junior doctors in Sierra Leone. It is timely as there is increasing political and professional momentum to expand PGME locally. Findings may guide those involved in this PGME expansion in terms of how possibly to influence junior doctors in their career decision-making.