Literature DB >> 11751195

Assessment of a bronchoscopy simulator.

D Ost1, A DeRosiers, E J Britt, A M Fein, M L Lesser, A C Mehta.   

Abstract

The study objective was to validate a flexible bronchoscopy simulator by determining if it could differentiate between expert and novice bronchoscopists. A subsequent evaluation phase was then done to determine whether use of the simulator would improve the rate of bronchoscopy skill acquisition for new pulmonary fellows. A multicenter prospective cohort study was performed using a bronchoscopy simulator. Three cohorts were evaluated based on the number of bronchoscopies previously performed: "experts" (> 500, n = 9), "intermediates" (25 to 500, n = 8), and "novices" (none, n = 11). Each participant performed two simulated cases with performance measures being recorded by the simulator. Performance measures that distinguished between groups were then used to evaluate the learning curve for new fellows training on the simulator. A randomized-controlled trial was then conducted comparing the quality of bronchoscopy performance for new pulmonary fellows who were trained either with conventional methods or with the simulator. Expert bronchoscopists performed better on the simulator than intermediates who performed better than novices in terms of procedure time, percentage of segments visualized, time in red-out, and wall collisions. Training of new fellows demonstrated that after performing 20 bronchoscopic simulations, the skill level acquired with the simulator significantly improved in terms of speed, percentage of segments visualized, time in red-out, and collisions. Fellows trained on the simulator performed better than fellows trained using conventional methods during their first actual bronchoscopies as assessed by procedure time (815 versus 1,168 s, p = 0.001), a bronchoscopy nurse's subjective quality assessment score (7.7 +/- 0.3 versus 3.7 +/- 2.5, p = 0.05), and by a quantitative bronchoscopy quality score (percentage of segments correctly identified/procedure time, 0.119 +/- 0.015 versus 0.046 +/- 034, p = 0.03). In conclusion, the bronchoscopy simulator was able to accurately assess bronchoscopy experience level. Training new fellows on the bronchoscopy simulator leads to more rapid acquisition of bronchoscopy expertise compared with conventional training methods. This technology has the potential to facilitate bronchoscopy training and to improve objective evaluations of bronchoscopy skills.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11751195     DOI: 10.1164/ajrccm.164.12.2102087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med        ISSN: 1073-449X            Impact factor:   21.405


  26 in total

Review 1.  Medical simulation in respiratory and critical care medicine.

Authors:  Godfrey Lam; Najib T Ayas; Donald E Griesdale; Adam D Peets
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 2.584

Review 2.  VR to OR: a review of the evidence that virtual reality simulation improves operating room performance.

Authors:  Neal E Seymour
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Evaluation of a novel method of teaching endobronchial ultrasound: physician- versus respiratory therapist-proctored simulation training.

Authors:  David Ryan Stather; Alex Chee; Paul Maceachern; Elaine Dumoulin; Christopher A Hergott; Jacob Gelberg; Sandra D Scott; Sylvia De Guzman; Alain Tremblay
Journal:  Can Respir J       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 2.409

Review 4.  A review of the role of simulation in developing and assessing orthopaedic surgical skills.

Authors:  Geb W Thomas; Brian D Johns; J Lawrence Marsh; Donald D Anderson
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2014

5.  Adult Bronchoscopy Training: Current State and Suggestions for the Future: CHEST Expert Panel Report.

Authors:  Armin Ernst; Momen M Wahidi; Charles A Read; John D Buckley; Doreen J Addrizzo-Harris; Pallav L Shah; Felix J F Herth; Alberto de Hoyos Parra; Joseph Ornelas; Lonny Yarmus; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 6.  Simulation Training in the ICU.

Authors:  Nitin Seam; Ai Jin Lee; Megan Vennero; Lillian Emlet
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 9.410

7.  Intraocular pressure increases after complex simulated surgical procedures in residents: an experimental study.

Authors:  Jesús Vera; Carolina Diaz-Piedra; Raimundo Jiménez; Jose M Sanchez-Carrion; Leandro L Di Stasi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Wet laboratory versus computer simulation for learning endobronchial ultrasound: a randomized trial.

Authors:  David Ryan Stather; Paul MacEachern; Alex Chee; Elaine Dumoulin; Christopher A Hergott; Alain Tremblay
Journal:  Can Respir J       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.409

Review 9.  Simulation-based bronchoscopy training: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cassie C Kennedy; Fabien Maldonado; David A Cook
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 9.410

10.  Diagnostic importance of pulmonary interleukin-1beta and interleukin-8 in ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Authors:  Andrew Conway Morris; Kallirroi Kefala; Thomas S Wilkinson; Olga Lucia Moncayo-Nieto; Kevin Dhaliwal; Lesley Farrell; Timothy S Walsh; Simon J Mackenzie; David G Swann; Peter J D Andrews; Niall Anderson; John R W Govan; Ian F Laurenson; Hamish Reid; Donald J Davidson; Christopher Haslett; Jean-Michel Sallenave; A John Simpson
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 9.139

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.