Comparison of self versus expert-assisted feedback for cricothyroidotomy training: a randomized trial.
Feedback
Medical education research
Simulation
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Jun 2022
14 Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
12
12
2021
accepted:
30
05
2022
entrez:
14
6
2022
pubmed:
15
6
2022
medline:
18
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The self-video feedback method may have the potential to provide a low-cost alternative to physician-driven simulation-based training. This study aimed to assess the utility of two video feedback methods by comparing the improvement in performing cricothyroidotomy procedure following self video feedback (trainees review their performance by themselves) and expert-assisted video feedback (trainees review their performance while an emergency physician provides additional feedback). This study was pretest-posttest and two-group designed research performed at a university simulation center with 89 final-year medical students and used a cricothyroidotomy simulation model. After seeing an educational presentation and a best practice video, trainees were randomized into two groups; self video feedback group (SVFG) and expert-assisted video feedback group (EVFG). They performed the cricothyroidotomy before and after the feedback. The procedures were also recorded and scored by two emergency physicians. There was a statistically significant improvement between pre-feedback and post-feedback assessments in terms of scores received and time needed for the procedures in both SVFG and EVFG groups (p < 0.05). Additionally, the post-feedback assessment scores were higher and time needed for the procedure was lower in the EVFG when compared with SVFG (p < 0.05 for both). Results demonstrated significant improvement in cricothyroidotomy performance with both types of video feedback method. Even though the improvement was better in the EVFG compared to the SVFG, the self video feedback may have value especially in situations where expert-assisted feedback is not possible.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The self-video feedback method may have the potential to provide a low-cost alternative to physician-driven simulation-based training. This study aimed to assess the utility of two video feedback methods by comparing the improvement in performing cricothyroidotomy procedure following self video feedback (trainees review their performance by themselves) and expert-assisted video feedback (trainees review their performance while an emergency physician provides additional feedback).
METHODS
METHODS
This study was pretest-posttest and two-group designed research performed at a university simulation center with 89 final-year medical students and used a cricothyroidotomy simulation model. After seeing an educational presentation and a best practice video, trainees were randomized into two groups; self video feedback group (SVFG) and expert-assisted video feedback group (EVFG). They performed the cricothyroidotomy before and after the feedback. The procedures were also recorded and scored by two emergency physicians.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There was a statistically significant improvement between pre-feedback and post-feedback assessments in terms of scores received and time needed for the procedures in both SVFG and EVFG groups (p < 0.05). Additionally, the post-feedback assessment scores were higher and time needed for the procedure was lower in the EVFG when compared with SVFG (p < 0.05 for both).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Results demonstrated significant improvement in cricothyroidotomy performance with both types of video feedback method. Even though the improvement was better in the EVFG compared to the SVFG, the self video feedback may have value especially in situations where expert-assisted feedback is not possible.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35701782
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03519-z
pii: 10.1186/s12909-022-03519-z
pmc: PMC9199165
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
455Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Emerg Med. 2017 Dec;53(6):885-889
pubmed: 29066133
Med Teach. 2016 Jun;38(6):607-12
pubmed: 26383586
J Surg Educ. 2015 Jul-Aug;72(4):697-703
pubmed: 25703737
Am J Surg. 2004 Mar;187(3):427-32
pubmed: 15006577
J Surg Educ. 2017 Jul - Aug;74(4):612-620
pubmed: 28041770
Med Teach. 2017 Dec;39(12):1245-1249
pubmed: 28927332
Med Educ. 2009 Jun;43(6):507-15
pubmed: 19493173
Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2017 Jun 1;59(2):123-131
pubmed: 28704187
AEM Educ Train. 2019 Aug 12;4(1):36-42
pubmed: 31989069
Wilderness Environ Med. 2020 Sep;31(3):291-297
pubmed: 32855020
Anesthesiology. 2003 Feb;98(2):349-53
pubmed: 12552192
Med Teach. 2006 Aug;28(5):429-34
pubmed: 16973455
Med Teach. 2012;34(4):279-84
pubmed: 22455696
AEM Educ Train. 2019 Apr 07;3(3):280-285
pubmed: 31360821
Resuscitation. 2017 Jan;110:37-41
pubmed: 27810460
Perspect Med Educ. 2015 Dec;4(6):284-99
pubmed: 26621488
Med Educ. 2008 Feb;42(2):189-97
pubmed: 18230092