The effectiveness of a human patient simulator in the ATLS shock skills station
The effectiveness of a human patient simulator in the ATLS shock skills station
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jss.2006.08.010
复制
发表时间：
2007-05-15
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Ali, Jameel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cherry, Robert Allen;Williams, Jack;Ali, Jameel
背景使用模拟作为教学辅助先进创伤生命支持（ATLS）没有经过严格的心理测试。我们假设一个先进的，计算机控制的人类病人模拟器（HPS）将是一个有用的辅助ATLS休克技能站。材料和方法。44名参加ATLS课程的PGY-1居民被随机分为对照组（CTL）和实验组（EXP）。所有学生都参加了一个冲击特定的前和后测试多项选择题考试（MCQE）。EXP组在电击技能站使用HPS; CTL组以传统方式进行教学。所有的学生参加了实验性的，休克特定的客观结构化临床考试（欧安组织）会议结束时，他们的表现进行了评估。EXP组对电击技能训练站的教学效果进行评价。EXP组和CTL组在测试前后MCQE或评分变化方面无统计学显著差异。这些团体在欧安组织专门打击恐怖主义期间的总体表现相似。EXP和CTL组在休克识别、休克类型识别和选择正确治疗计划的能力方面等同。EXP组中91%的电击技能站被评为非常好到优秀，而CTL组为63%。EXP组认为模拟器在学习分析来自监测器的数据方面最有帮助。在ATLS电击技能站期间使用先进的HPS相当于基于心理测量测试的传统教学场景。学生们主观上更喜欢模拟器作为教学工具，并发现它在学习如何将血流动力学监测仪的数据整合到临床决策中最有用。(C)2007年爱思唯尔公司All rights reserved.
Background. The use of simulation as a teaching adjunct in Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) has not undergone rigorous psychometric testing. We hypothesized that an advanced, computer-controlled human patient simulator (HPS) would be a useful adjunct to the ATLS shock skills station.Materials and methods. Forty-four PGY-1 residents enrolled in ATLS courses were randomized into control (CTL) and experimental (EXP) groups. All students took a shock-specific pre- and post-test multiple choice question examination (MCQE). The EXP group used the HPS in the shock skills station; the CTL group was taught in a traditional manner. All students participated in an experimental, shock-specific objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) session at the end and had their performance evaluated. The EXP group was asked to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of the shock skills station.Results. There were no statistically significant differences between the EXP and CTL groups with respect to the pre- and post-test MCQE or the change in scores. The groups were similar in their overall performance during the shock-specific OSCE. The EXP and CTL groups were equivalent with respect to shock recognition, identification of the type of shock, and ability to select the correct treatment plan. The shock skills station was rated from very good to excellent in 91% of the EXP group versus 63% in the CTL group. The EXP group rated the simulator most helpful in learning to analyze data from the monitors.Conclusions. Use of an advanced HPS during the ATLS shock skills station was equivalent to traditional teaching scenarios based on psychometric testing. Students subjectively preferred the simulator as a teaching tool and found it most useful in learning how to integrate data from hemodynamic monitors into clinical decision making. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.