Traci Adams1, Chad Newton1, Hetal Patel1, Melanie Sulistio2, Andrew Tomlinson1, Won Lee1. 1. Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 2. Department of Cardiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Centre, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but it has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation. In this study, we sought to compare debriefing sessions of internal medicine (IM) intern simulation sessions led by academic faculty doctors with those led by senior IM residents in order to measure the effectiveness of near-peer teaching in this setting. Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation METHOD: Internal medicine interns participated in four simulation cases, two of which were debriefed by faculty members and two of which were debriefed by residents. Pre-simulation knowledge assessment was completed prior to the case. Following each debriefing, interns completed a Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) survey. Post-simulation knowledge assessments were completed 6 months after simulation. Debriefings were recorded and transcribed. Each statement made during debriefing was classified as either correct or erroneous by blinded reviewers. RESULTS: Fifty interns participated in simulation, and the response rate on the DASH survey was 88%. There was no difference between DASH scores (p = 0.13), post-simulation knowledge assessments or error rates during debriefing (p = 0.31) for faculty member and resident instructors. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that residents and faculty members provide a similar quality of simulation instruction based on qualitative and quantitative evaluation.
BACKGROUND: Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but it has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation. In this study, we sought to compare debriefing sessions of internal medicine (IM) intern simulation sessions led by academic faculty doctors with those led by senior IM residents in order to measure the effectiveness of near-peer teaching in this setting. Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation METHOD: Internal medicine interns participated in four simulation cases, two of which were debriefed by faculty members and two of which were debriefed by residents. Pre-simulation knowledge assessment was completed prior to the case. Following each debriefing, interns completed a Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) survey. Post-simulation knowledge assessments were completed 6 months after simulation. Debriefings were recorded and transcribed. Each statement made during debriefing was classified as either correct or erroneous by blinded reviewers. RESULTS: Fifty interns participated in simulation, and the response rate on the DASH survey was 88%. There was no difference between DASH scores (p = 0.13), post-simulation knowledge assessments or error rates during debriefing (p = 0.31) for faculty member and resident instructors. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that residents and faculty members provide a similar quality of simulation instruction based on qualitative and quantitative evaluation.
Authors: Jen Hoogenes; Polina Mironova; Oleg Safir; Sydney A McQueen; Hesham Abdelbary; Michael Drexler; Markku Nousiainen; Peter Ferguson; William Kraemer; Benjamin Alman; Richard K Reznick; Ranil R Sonnadara Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2014-10-22 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Eli M Miloslavsky; Zaven Sargsyan; Janae K Heath; Rachel Kohn; George A Alba; James A Gordon; Paul F Currier Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Marisa Brett-Fleegler; Jenny Rudolph; Walter Eppich; Michael Monuteaux; Eric Fleegler; Adam Cheng; Robert Simon Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: Susan K Mathai; Eli M Miloslavsky; Fernando M Contreras-Valdes; Tanya Milosh-Zinkus; Emily M Hayden; James A Gordon; Paul F Currier Journal: Med Teach Date: 2014-02-04 Impact factor: 3.650
Authors: Suzanne L Strom; Craig L Anderson; Luanna Yang; Cecilia Canales; Alpesh Amin; Shahram Lotfipour; C Eric McCoy; Megan Boysen Osborn; Mark I Langdorf Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2015-11-22
Authors: Begoña Bartolomé Villar; Irene Real Benlloch; Ana De la Hoz Calvo; Gleyvis Coro-Montanet Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-09 Impact factor: 4.614