Journal of graduate medical education · 2014
Repeated versus varied case selection in pediatric resident simulation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tofil Nancy M, Peterson Dawn Taylor, Wheeler Julie Turner, Youngblood Amber, Zinkan J Lynn, Lara Diego, Jakaitis Brett, Niebauer Julia, White Marjorie Lee
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Repeated exposure to pediatric emergency scenarios improves technical skills, but it is unclear whether repeated exposure to specific cases affects medical decision making in varied cases.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether repeated exposure to 1 scenario would translate to improved performance and decision making in varied scenarios.
METHODS: Senior pediatrics residents participated in 3 scenarios with scripted debriefing. Residents were randomized to repeated practice (RP) scenarios or mixed (MIX) scenarios. RP residents completed pulseless electrical activity (PEA) with different stems (Case 1, 2, 3). MIX residents completed PEA (Case 1), seizure (Case 2), and ventricular tachycardia (Case 3) scenarios. Four months later, participants returned to complete 3 more cases: PEA (Case 4), seizure (Case 5), and critical coarctation (Case 6).
RESULTS: Twenty-three residents participated in the study and were randomized to either the RP or the MIX group. The RP group showed statistically significant improvement in time to start chest compressions, whereas the MIX group showed no improvement. Use of a backboard improved significantly in Case 4 for the RP group but not for the MIX group. Similarly, time to check glucose in the seizure scenario was significantly better in the MIX group that had previous exposure to a seizure scenario. No differences in performance were noted between groups in Case 6, which was new to both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study indicate that whereas repeated exposure may improve decision-making skills in similar scenarios, it may not translate to improved medical decision making in other scenarios.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether repeated exposure to 1 scenario would translate to improved performance and decision making in varied scenarios.
METHODS: Senior pediatrics residents participated in 3 scenarios with scripted debriefing. Residents were randomized to repeated practice (RP) scenarios or mixed (MIX) scenarios. RP residents completed pulseless electrical activity (PEA) with different stems (Case 1, 2, 3). MIX residents completed PEA (Case 1), seizure (Case 2), and ventricular tachycardia (Case 3) scenarios. Four months later, participants returned to complete 3 more cases: PEA (Case 4), seizure (Case 5), and critical coarctation (Case 6).
RESULTS: Twenty-three residents participated in the study and were randomized to either the RP or the MIX group. The RP group showed statistically significant improvement in time to start chest compressions, whereas the MIX group showed no improvement. Use of a backboard improved significantly in Case 4 for the RP group but not for the MIX group. Similarly, time to check glucose in the seizure scenario was significantly better in the MIX group that had previous exposure to a seizure scenario. No differences in performance were noted between groups in Case 6, which was new to both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study indicate that whereas repeated exposure may improve decision-making skills in similar scenarios, it may not translate to improved medical decision making in other scenarios.