Literature DB >> 35514867

Inherent variability in airway characteristics of simulation manikins: is it time we standardised assessments of crisis management skills?

Balakrishnan Ashokka1, Krishnasamy Narendiran2, Abhijit Bhattacharya3, Dinker Pai4, Shen Liang5,6, Shoba Subramanian2, Ernest T Larmie3, Fun Gee Chen1.   

Abstract

Introduction: Learning of simulation-based crisis management skills involves technologically advanced manikins and use of automated scenarios. Progressions in preprogrammed scenarios require finite task completion such as successful airway intubations for achieving optimal learning outcomes aligned to curricular goals. The study was set to explore the existing variability among various simulation manikins in use at our institute for undergraduate medical education.
Methods: 56 final-year undergraduate students, who had received prior training in airway management skills, performed intubations on each of the 5 different manikins (56×5=280 intubations). The manikins used were the Human Patient Simulator (HPS), iStan & Emergency Care Simulator (ECS) from CAE Healthcare and Mega Code Kelly (MCK) and Airway Trainer (AWTR) from Laerdal. The students' performances were compared for success rates, ease of intubation, grade of laryngeal visualisation and presence of tooth injury on the manikins, Data from the intubations were cross-tabulated and evaluated by general estimating equation analysis using the Poisson model.
Results: iStan had the higher rates of failure to intubate (64.3%). iStan (62.5%) and HPS (57.1%) had statistically significant teeth injury (p<0.0001) compared to other manikins. HPS and AWTR had the least difficult grades of laryngeal visualisation (Cormack Lehane grades 1 and 2), while the most difficult grade of visualisation (Cormack Lehane grades 3 and 4) was reported in ECS (44.6%). Conclusions: Each of the high-technology manikins used in automated scenarios for crisis management teaching and learning has heterogeneity in airway features. Since frequent airway management is a critical component of simulation scenarios, this can affect student performance when these manikins are used for formative and summative high-stakes assessments. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assessment of crisis management skills; Simulation based learning

Year:  2016        PMID: 35514867      PMCID: PMC8990205          DOI: 10.1136/bmjstel-2016-000109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn        ISSN: 2056-6697


  18 in total

1.  Simulation and clinical practice: strengthening the relationship.

Authors:  R L Kneebone; W Scott; A Darzi; M Horrocks
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 6.251

2.  Evaluation of four airway training manikins as simulators for inserting the LMA Classic*.

Authors:  J Silsby; G Jordan; G Bayley; T M Cook
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 6.955

3.  The pretrained novice: using simulation-based training to improve learning in the operating room.

Authors:  Kent R Van Sickle; E Matt Ritter; C Daniel Smith
Journal:  Surg Innov       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 2.058

4.  Dental injuries resulting from tracheal intubation--a retrospective study.

Authors:  Jobst Vogel; Stefan Stübinger; Markus Kaufmann; Gabriel Krastl; Andreas Filippi
Journal:  Dent Traumatol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.333

5.  Simulation in healthcare education: a best evidence practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 82.

Authors:  Ivette Motola; Luke A Devine; Hyun Soo Chung; John E Sullivan; S Barry Issenberg
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 3.650

6.  Unlike History, Should a Simulator Not Repeat Itself?

Authors:  Samsun Lampotang
Journal:  Simul Healthc       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.929

7.  Cormack-Lehane classification revisited.

Authors:  R Krage; C van Rijn; D van Groeningen; S A Loer; L A Schwarte; P Schober
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 9.166

8.  Acquisition of critical intraoperative event management skills in novice anesthesiology residents by using high-fidelity simulation-based training.

Authors:  Christine S Park; Lauryn R Rochlen; Edward Yaghmour; Nicole Higgins; Jeanette R Bauchat; Kyle G Wojciechowski; John T Sullivan; Robert J McCarthy
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 7.892

9.  Patient opinions and attitudes toward medical student procedures in the emergency department.

Authors:  Mark A Graber; Jessica Pierre; Mary Charlton
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.451

Review 10.  Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review.

Authors:  S Barry Issenberg; William C McGaghie; Emil R Petrusa; David Lee Gordon; Ross J Scalese
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.650

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.