Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model?
Objective. To compare simulation task trainers (sim) with cadaver for teaching chest tube insertion to junior residents. Methods. Prospective study involving postgraduate year (PGY) one and two emergency medicine (EM) and PGY-1 surgery residents. Residents were randomized into sim or cadaver groups...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | Emergency Medicine International |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9179042 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832545792470024192 |
|---|---|
| author | Ting Xu Tan Paula Buchanan Erin Quattromani |
| author_facet | Ting Xu Tan Paula Buchanan Erin Quattromani |
| author_sort | Ting Xu Tan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective. To compare simulation task trainers (sim) with cadaver for teaching chest tube insertion to junior residents. Methods. Prospective study involving postgraduate year (PGY) one and two emergency medicine (EM) and PGY-1 surgery residents. Residents were randomized into sim or cadaver groups based on prior experience and trained using deliberate practice. Primary outcomes were confidence in placing a chest tube and ability to place a chest tube in a clinical setting during a seven-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include skill retention, using an objective assessment checklist of 15 critical steps in chest tube placement, and confidence after seven months. Results. Sixteen residents were randomized to cadaver (n=8) and simulation (n=8) groups. Both groups posttraining had statistically significant increase in confidence. No significant difference existed between groups for median posttraining assessment scores (13.5 sim v 15 cadaver). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for confidence at any point measured. There was moderate correlation (0.58) between number of clinical attempts reported in a seven-month follow-up period and final assessment score. Conclusion. Both sim and cadaver models are effective modalities for teaching chest tube placement. Medical education programs can use either modalities to train learners without notable differences in confidence. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-78587d75d47c42e5b6646e8fe0ab01bd |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2090-2840 2090-2859 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Emergency Medicine International |
| spelling | doaj-art-78587d75d47c42e5b6646e8fe0ab01bd2025-02-03T07:24:46ZengWileyEmergency Medicine International2090-28402090-28592018-01-01201810.1155/2018/91790429179042Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model?Ting Xu Tan0Paula Buchanan1Erin Quattromani2Department of Surgery, Division of Emergency Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, 3635 Vista Ave, St. Louis, Missouri, 63110, USACenter for Health Outcomes Research, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Ave, Room 409B, St. Louis, MO 63108, USADepartment of Surgery, Division of Emergency Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, 3635 Vista Ave, St. Louis, Missouri, 63110, USAObjective. To compare simulation task trainers (sim) with cadaver for teaching chest tube insertion to junior residents. Methods. Prospective study involving postgraduate year (PGY) one and two emergency medicine (EM) and PGY-1 surgery residents. Residents were randomized into sim or cadaver groups based on prior experience and trained using deliberate practice. Primary outcomes were confidence in placing a chest tube and ability to place a chest tube in a clinical setting during a seven-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include skill retention, using an objective assessment checklist of 15 critical steps in chest tube placement, and confidence after seven months. Results. Sixteen residents were randomized to cadaver (n=8) and simulation (n=8) groups. Both groups posttraining had statistically significant increase in confidence. No significant difference existed between groups for median posttraining assessment scores (13.5 sim v 15 cadaver). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for confidence at any point measured. There was moderate correlation (0.58) between number of clinical attempts reported in a seven-month follow-up period and final assessment score. Conclusion. Both sim and cadaver models are effective modalities for teaching chest tube placement. Medical education programs can use either modalities to train learners without notable differences in confidence.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9179042 |
| spellingShingle | Ting Xu Tan Paula Buchanan Erin Quattromani Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? Emergency Medicine International |
| title | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
| title_full | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
| title_fullStr | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
| title_short | Teaching Residents Chest Tubes: Simulation Task Trainer or Cadaver Model? |
| title_sort | teaching residents chest tubes simulation task trainer or cadaver model |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9179042 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tingxutan teachingresidentschesttubessimulationtasktrainerorcadavermodel AT paulabuchanan teachingresidentschesttubessimulationtasktrainerorcadavermodel AT erinquattromani teachingresidentschesttubessimulationtasktrainerorcadavermodel |