Literature DB >> 18499174

Urology resident training with an unexpected patient death scenario: experiential learning with high fidelity simulation.

Matthew T Gettman1, R Jeffrey Karnes, Jacqueline J Arnold, Janee M Klipfel, Helen T Vierstraete, Mary E Johnson, Daniel R Johnson, Bradley C Leibovich.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Communicating unexpected news of a patient death is rarely encountered in urology. We evaluated resident performance during an unexpected patient death scenario involving high fidelity simulation. We also studied simulation as a tool to teach and assess nontechnical skills in urology.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An unexpected patient death scenario was developed at a simulation center using high fidelity mannequins, urology residents, critical care fellows, nurses, hospital chaplains and actors. Scenario objectives addressed Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies. The 19 urology residents in training years 2 to 6 participated in the scenario. Performance was evaluated using 5-point Likert scale questionnaires and checklists completed by residents, faculty and actors.
RESULTS: Overall resident performance was satisfactory in the simulation scenario. Verification of code status was identified as an area requiring improvement. Euphemisms for death were more commonly used in the initial delivery (16 residents or 84.2%) than the preferred words died or death (3 or 15.8%). After completing the scenario the perceived competency of residents increased from 73.7% before to 94.7% after the scenario. In addition, all residents agreed that the simulation experience was useful and overall realistic, and it should be part of the training curriculum.
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of urology resident performance was possible during an unexpected patient death scenario. Upon completion of the scenario perceived competency of the simulation task was increased. High fidelity simulation was found to be an effective method for teaching and assessing the acquisition of nontechnical skills. All residents agreed that the simulation was useful and should be included in urological training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18499174     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  5 in total

1.  [The GESRU Endo-Training - strategies for the optimization of endourological skills for residents].

Authors:  C P Meyer; J Salem; L A Kluth; N Sanatgar; H Borgmann; P Grange; F-K Chun
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Simulated death enhances learner attitudes regarding simulation.

Authors:  Chang H Park; Douglas Wetmore; Daniel Katz; Samuel DeMaria; Adam I Levine; Andrew T Goldberg
Journal:  BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn       Date:  2017-12-09

3.  Characterizing the Language Used to Discuss Death in Family Meetings for Critically Ill Infants.

Authors:  Margaret H Barlet; Mary C Barks; Peter A Ubel; J Kelly Davis; Kathryn I Pollak; Erica C Kaye; Kevin P Weinfurt; Monica E Lemmon
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-10-03

4.  Does the unexpected death of the manikin in a simulation maintain the participants' perceived self-efficacy? An observational prospective study with medical students.

Authors:  Anne Weiss; Morgan Jaffrelot; Jean-Claude Bartier; Thierry Pottecher; Isabelle Borraccia; Gilles Mahoudeau; Eric Noll; Véronique Brunstein; Chloé Delacour; Thierry Pelaccia
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 2.463

5.  Virtual Reality and Simulation for Progressive Treatments in Urology.

Authors:  Alaric Hamacher; Taeg Keun Whangbo; Su Jin Kim; Kyung Jin Chung
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 2.835

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.