Literature DB >> 19120041

Training neonatal skills with simulators?

A P Cavaleiro1, H Guimarães, Fl Calheiros.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare two different ways of learning (self-study vs. simulation sessions) the adequate steps to resuscitate a neonate in the 5th year undergraduate medical curriculum.
METHODS: One hundred and eighty students attending the 5-week paediatrics rotation were enrolled; 115 were invited to participate in this study, but only 45 students completed it. After a 50-min 'neonatal resuscitation' theoretical interactive class, students were randomly assigned into two groups: the first (n = 21) participated in a 30-min supervised self-study session, while the second (n = 24) attended a 30-min neonatal resuscitation session using the Zoe (Gaumard Inc., Miami, FL, USA) simulator.
RESULTS: Tests consisting of 50 multiple-choice questions were taken before the theoretical class (pre-theoretical test), before the self-study or simulation session (pre-test) and after this session (post-test). Pre-test and post-test scores were similar in both groups (p = 0.118 and p = 0.263, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Simulation-based training of medical students in management of neonatal resuscitation do not led to significant differences on short-term knowledge comparing with traditional method.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19120041     DOI: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2008.01176.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Paediatr        ISSN: 0803-5253            Impact factor:   2.299


  12 in total

1.  Part 12: Education, implementation, and teams: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.

Authors:  Jasmeet Soar; Mary E Mancini; Farhan Bhanji; John E Billi; Jennifer Dennett; Judith Finn; Matthew Huei-Ming Ma; Gavin D Perkins; David L Rodgers; Mary Fran Hazinski; Ian Jacobs; Peter T Morley
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.262

2.  Simulation in resuscitation teaching and training, an evidence based practice review.

Authors:  Sandeep Sahu; Indu Lata
Journal:  J Emerg Trauma Shock       Date:  2010-10

3.  Evaluation of a multimodal teaching method on essential newborn care among health providers at a tertiary care hospital.

Authors:  G Shridhar; Abhishek Pandey; Saurabh Karmani
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2018-08-14

Review 4.  Virtual reality training for improving the skills needed for performing surgery of the ear, nose or throat.

Authors:  Patorn Piromchai; Alex Avery; Malinee Laopaiboon; Gregor Kennedy; Stephen O'Leary
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-09

5.  Simulation-based learning combined with debriefing: trainers satisfaction with a new approach to training the trainers to teach neonatal resuscitation.

Authors:  Harish J Amin; Khalid Aziz; Louis P Halamek; Tanya N Beran
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2013-07-04

Review 6.  The role of simulation in teaching pediatric resuscitation: current perspectives.

Authors:  Yiqun Lin; Adam Cheng
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2015-03-31

Review 7.  How valid are commercially available medical simulators?

Authors:  Jj Stunt; Ph Wulms; Gm Kerkhoffs; J Dankelman; Cn van Dijk; Gjm Tuijthof
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2014-10-14

Review 8.  Standardised formal resuscitation training programmes for reducing mortality and morbidity in newborn infants.

Authors:  Eugene Dempsey; Mohan Pammi; Anthony C Ryan; Keith J Barrington
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-04

9.  Randomized control trial of high fidelity vs low fidelity simulation for training undergraduate students in neonatal resuscitation.

Authors:  Archana Nimbalkar; Dipen Patel; Amit Kungwani; Ajay Phatak; Rohitkumar Vasa; Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2015-11-03

Review 10.  Five Questions Critical Care Educators Should Ask About Simulation-Based Medical Education.

Authors:  Dominique Piquette; Vicki R LeBlanc
Journal:  Clin Chest Med       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 2.878

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.