Nahush A Mokadam1, James I Fann2, George L Hicks3, Jonathan C Nesbitt4, Harold M Burkhart5, John V Conte6, Daniel N Coore7, Paul S Ramphal7, K Robert Shen8, Jennifer D Walker9, Richard H Feins10. 1. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Electronic address: mokadamn@uw.edu. 2. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 3. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York. 4. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee. 5. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 6. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 7. Department of Computing, University of the West Indies, Mona, Jamaica. 8. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 9. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts. 10. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum was developed at 8 institutions from 2010 to 2013. A total of 27 residents were trained by 18 faculty members. A survey was conducted to gain insight into the initial experience. METHODS: Residents and faculty were sent a 72- and 68-question survey, respectively. In addition to demographic information, participants reported their view of the overall impact of the curriculum. Focused investigation into each of the 6 modules was obtained. Participants evaluated the value of the specific simulators used. Institutional biases regarding implementation of the curriculum were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty (74%) residents and 14 (78%) faculty responded. The majority (70%) of residents completed this training in their first and second year of traditional-track programs. The modules were well regarded with no respondents having an unfavorable view. Both residents and faculty found low, moderate, and high fidelity simulators to be extremely useful, with particular emphasis on utility of high fidelity components. The vast majority of residents (85%) and faculty (100%) felt more comfortable in the resident skill set and performance in the operating room. Simulation of rare adverse events allowed for development of multidisciplinary teams to address them. At most institutions, the conduct of this curriculum took precedence over clinical obligations (64%). CONCLUSIONS: The Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum was implemented with robust adoption among the investigating centers. Both residents and faculty viewed the modules favorably. Using this curriculum, participants indicated an improvement in resident technical skills and were enthusiastic about training in adverse events and crisis management.
BACKGROUND: The Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum was developed at 8 institutions from 2010 to 2013. A total of 27 residents were trained by 18 faculty members. A survey was conducted to gain insight into the initial experience. METHODS: Residents and faculty were sent a 72- and 68-question survey, respectively. In addition to demographic information, participants reported their view of the overall impact of the curriculum. Focused investigation into each of the 6 modules was obtained. Participants evaluated the value of the specific simulators used. Institutional biases regarding implementation of the curriculum were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty (74%) residents and 14 (78%) faculty responded. The majority (70%) of residents completed this training in their first and second year of traditional-track programs. The modules were well regarded with no respondents having an unfavorable view. Both residents and faculty found low, moderate, and high fidelity simulators to be extremely useful, with particular emphasis on utility of high fidelity components. The vast majority of residents (85%) and faculty (100%) felt more comfortable in the resident skill set and performance in the operating room. Simulation of rare adverse events allowed for development of multidisciplinary teams to address them. At most institutions, the conduct of this curriculum took precedence over clinical obligations (64%). CONCLUSIONS: The Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum was implemented with robust adoption among the investigating centers. Both residents and faculty viewed the modules favorably. Using this curriculum, participants indicated an improvement in resident technical skills and were enthusiastic about training in adverse events and crisis management.
Authors: Joshua B Gafford; Scott Webster; Neal Dillon; Evan Blum; Richard Hendrick; Fabien Maldonado; Erin A Gillaspie; Otis B Rickman; S Duke Herrell; Robert J Webster Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 3.934