Literature DB >> 35517842

Is a haptic simulation interface more effective than computer mouse-based interface for neonatal intubation skills training?

Anup Agarwal1, Julie Leviter2, Candace Mannarino2, Orly Levit2, Lindsay Johnston2, Marc Auerbach2.   

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of a three-dimensional (3D) haptic interface to a two-dimensional (2D) mouse interface for a screen-based simulation (SBS) neonatal intubation (NI) training intervention. Primary hypothesis: a haptic interface is more effective than a mouse interface for SBS training intervention for NI. Secondary hypothesis: SBS training, regardless of interface, will result in improved NI performance on a neonatal airway simulator.
Methods: 45 participants were randomised to either a haptics or a mouse interface to complete an identical SBS training intervention for NI over a five-month period. Participants completed pre- and post-training surveys to assess demographics, experience, knowledge and attitudes. The primary outcome of participants' NI skills performance was assessed on a neonatal manikin simulator. Skills were measured pre- and post- training by number of attempts and time to successfully intubate, and airway visualization.
Results: The demographics, training and experience were similar between groups. There was no difference in the improvement in skills, knowledge, attitudes or satisfaction ratings pre- and post-training between the groups. There was a significant decrease in number of attempts to intubate a neonatal airway simulator (2.89 vs 1.96, p<0.05) and improvement in the percent of subjects intubating in <30 seconds (22% vs 27%, p=0.02) from pre- to post-training in the study population overall.
Conclusion: Using a haptic interface did not have an advantage over a mouse interface in improving NI skills, knowledge, attitudes, or satisfaction. Overall, a SBS training intervention for NI improved skills measured on a neonatal airway simulator. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  computer simulation; infant, newborn; intubation; user-computer interface

Year:  2015        PMID: 35517842      PMCID: PMC8936558          DOI: 10.1136/bmjstel-2015-000016

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


  25 in total

1.  Haptics in minimally invasive surgical simulation and training.

Authors:  Cagatay Basdogan; Suvranu De; Jung Kim; Manivannan Muniyandi; Hyun Kim; Mandayam A Srinivasan
Journal:  IEEE Comput Graph Appl       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.088

2.  Limited value of haptics in virtual reality laparoscopic cholecystectomy training.

Authors:  Jonathan R Thompson; Anthony C Leonard; Charles R Doarn; Matt J Roesch; Timothy J Broderick
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-09-25       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Teaching intubation with cadavers: generosity at a time of loss.

Authors:  Mark R Mercurio
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2009 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.683

4.  Oral complications associated with endotracheal general anesthesia.

Authors:  J J Chen; L Susetio; C C Chao
Journal:  Ma Zui Xue Za Zhi       Date:  1990-06

5.  Role of simulation for paediatric proceduralists: practice makes perfect or trial and error?

Authors:  Sandeep S Bidarkar; James Wood; Ralph C Cohen; Andrew J A Holland
Journal:  J Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 1.954

6.  Evaluating the impact of simulation on translational patient outcomes.

Authors:  William C McGaghie; Timothy J Draycott; William F Dunn; Connie M Lopez; Dimitrios Stefanidis
Journal:  Simul Healthc       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.929

7.  Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics.

Authors:  R S Cormack; J Lehane
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 6.955

8.  Learn, see, practice, prove, do, maintain: an evidence-based pedagogical framework for procedural skill training in medicine.

Authors:  Taylor Sawyer; Marjorie White; Pavan Zaveri; Todd Chang; Anne Ades; Heather French; JoDee Anderson; Marc Auerbach; Lindsay Johnston; David Kessler
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 9.  Patient outcomes in simulation-based medical education: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benjamin Zendejas; Ryan Brydges; Amy T Wang; David A Cook
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  The usefulness of 3-dimensional virtual simulation using haptics in training orotracheal intubation.

Authors:  Dong Hoon Lee; Jae Gyu Kim; Chan Woong Kim; Chang Ha Lee; Jae Hee Lim
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.