BACKGROUND: Teaching procedural skills in a clinical setting is becoming increasingly difficult. Simulators can provide safe and inexpensive skills training. This randomized study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a bronchoscopy simulator in teaching clinical bronchoscopy. METHODS: Three groups of surgical residents were evaluated while performing an intraoperative flexible bronchoscopy. First year (PGY1) residents were randomly assigned to perform bronchoscopy either with (n = 5) or without (n = 5) preprocedural bronchoscopic simulator training (PreOp flexible bronchoscopic simulator, Immersion Medical, Gaithersburg, MD). Residents PGY2 to 3 (n = 3) with prior bronchoscopic experience (> or = 10 bronchoscopies) underwent evaluation without simulator training. Subjects were required to complete a systematic airway examination through a laryngeal mask airway with patients under general anesthesia. Evaluation criteria included procedure time, number of verbal and physical interventions by evaluator, and a rating of exam thoroughness, proficiency, and confidence. RESULTS: The PGY1 subjects who trained on the simulator required significantly fewer verbal (6.2 +/- 1.6 vs 3.2 +/- 0.8) and physical (1.6 +/- 0.2 vs 0.2 +/- 0.4) cues and performed more systematic examinations (2.6 +/- 0.5 vs 4.4 +/- 0.9 on scale 1 to 5) than those who did not use the trainer. The skill level of PGY1 subjects who worked with the simulator was similar to that of PGY2 to 3 residents experienced in bronchoscopy. Procedural times were not different between groups as the evaluator maintained the pace of the examination using verbal and physical assistance. CONCLUSIONS: One hour of training with the bronchoscopic simulator effectively taught residents basic bronchoscopy and familiarity with airway anatomy. Residents using the trainer performed first-time bronchoscopy nearly as competently as residents experienced with bronchoscopy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Teaching procedural skills in a clinical setting is becoming increasingly difficult. Simulators can provide safe and inexpensive skills training. This randomized study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a bronchoscopy simulator in teaching clinical bronchoscopy. METHODS: Three groups of surgical residents were evaluated while performing an intraoperative flexible bronchoscopy. First year (PGY1) residents were randomly assigned to perform bronchoscopy either with (n = 5) or without (n = 5) preprocedural bronchoscopic simulator training (PreOp flexible bronchoscopic simulator, Immersion Medical, Gaithersburg, MD). Residents PGY2 to 3 (n = 3) with prior bronchoscopic experience (> or = 10 bronchoscopies) underwent evaluation without simulator training. Subjects were required to complete a systematic airway examination through a laryngeal mask airway with patients under general anesthesia. Evaluation criteria included procedure time, number of verbal and physical interventions by evaluator, and a rating of exam thoroughness, proficiency, and confidence. RESULTS: The PGY1 subjects who trained on the simulator required significantly fewer verbal (6.2 +/- 1.6 vs 3.2 +/- 0.8) and physical (1.6 +/- 0.2 vs 0.2 +/- 0.4) cues and performed more systematic examinations (2.6 +/- 0.5 vs 4.4 +/- 0.9 on scale 1 to 5) than those who did not use the trainer. The skill level of PGY1 subjects who worked with the simulator was similar to that of PGY2 to 3 residents experienced in bronchoscopy. Procedural times were not different between groups as the evaluator maintained the pace of the examination using verbal and physical assistance. CONCLUSIONS: One hour of training with the bronchoscopic simulator effectively taught residents basic bronchoscopy and familiarity with airway anatomy. Residents using the trainer performed first-time bronchoscopy nearly as competently as residents experienced with bronchoscopy.
Authors: Mayank K Mittal; Sonal Dhuper; Chokkalingam Siva; John L Fresen; Marius Petruc; Celso R Velázquez Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.497
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
Authors: Benjamin D Singer; Thomas C Corbridge; Clara J Schroedl; Jane E Wilcox; Elaine R Cohen; William C McGaghie; Diane B Wayne Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 1.929