The exploration of remote simulation strategies for the acquisition of psychomotor skills in medicine: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Decentralized simulation
Peer learning
Simulation in surgery
Subcuticular sutures
Surgical education
Journal
Discover education
ISSN: 2731-5525
Titre abrégé: Discov Educ
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9918419273306676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
21
01
2023
accepted:
24
05
2023
medline:
20
7
2023
pubmed:
20
7
2023
entrez:
20
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Progress in remote educational strategies was fueled by the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic. This pilot RCT explored the efficacy of a decentralized model of simulation based on principles of observational and peer-to-peer learning for the acquisition of surgical skills. Sixty medical students from the University of Montreal learned the running subcuticular suture in four different conditions: (1) Control group (2) Self-learning (3) Peer-learning (4) Peer-learning with expert feedback. The control group learned with error-free videos, while the others, through videos illustrating strategic sub-optimal performances to be identified and discussed by students. Performance on a simulator at the end of the learning period, was assessed by an expert using a global rating scale (GRS) and checklist (CL). Students engaging in peer-to-peer learning strategies outperformed students who learned alone. The presence of an expert, and passive vs active observational learning strategies did not impact performance. This study supports the efficacy of a remote learning strategy and demonstrates how collaborative discourse optimizes the students' acquisition of surgical skills. These remote simulation strategies create the potential for implantation in future medical curriculum design.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Progress in remote educational strategies was fueled by the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic. This pilot RCT explored the efficacy of a decentralized model of simulation based on principles of observational and peer-to-peer learning for the acquisition of surgical skills.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Sixty medical students from the University of Montreal learned the running subcuticular suture in four different conditions: (1) Control group (2) Self-learning (3) Peer-learning (4) Peer-learning with expert feedback. The control group learned with error-free videos, while the others, through videos illustrating strategic sub-optimal performances to be identified and discussed by students. Performance on a simulator at the end of the learning period, was assessed by an expert using a global rating scale (GRS) and checklist (CL).
Results
UNASSIGNED
Students engaging in peer-to-peer learning strategies outperformed students who learned alone. The presence of an expert, and passive vs active observational learning strategies did not impact performance.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
This study supports the efficacy of a remote learning strategy and demonstrates how collaborative discourse optimizes the students' acquisition of surgical skills. These remote simulation strategies create the potential for implantation in future medical curriculum design.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37469757
doi: 10.1007/s44217-023-00041-2
pii: 41
pmc: PMC10352422
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04425499']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
19Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2023.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
Acad Med. 1990 Sep;65(9 Suppl):S63-7
pubmed: 2400509
Simul Healthc. 2014 Aug;9(4):249-59
pubmed: 25090169
Acad Med. 2010 May;85(5):806-12
pubmed: 20520031
Simul Healthc. 2012 Aug;7(4):236-42
pubmed: 22722705
J Adv Nurs. 2010 Aug;66(8):1832-44
pubmed: 20557388
Adv Simul (Lond). 2020 Jun 3;5:8
pubmed: 32514385
Simul Healthc. 2016 Oct;11(5):316-322
pubmed: 27388862
Acad Med. 2010 Oct;85(10 Suppl):S49-55
pubmed: 20881703
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;173:393-7
pubmed: 22357024
Can J Surg. 2013 Dec;56(6):E142-7
pubmed: 24284153
Acad Med. 2004 Oct;79(10 Suppl):S70-81
pubmed: 15383395
Perspect Clin Res. 2011 Jul;2(3):109-12
pubmed: 21897887
Int J Med Educ. 2019 Oct 25;10:191-192
pubmed: 31655795
Cureus. 2021 Mar 23;13(3):e14055
pubmed: 33898139
BMC Med Educ. 2021 Feb 15;21(1):102
pubmed: 33588822
J Vis Commun Med. 2005 Dec;28(4):150-5
pubmed: 16503567
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Acad Med. 1996 Dec;71(12):1363-5
pubmed: 9114900
Pain Res Manag. 2011 Nov-Dec;16(6):407-10
pubmed: 22184548
Med Educ. 2012 May;46(5):447-53
pubmed: 22515752
Med Educ. 2022 Apr;56(4):352-354
pubmed: 34970777
JMIR Res Protoc. 2020 Dec 14;9(12):e21273
pubmed: 33284780
Acad Med. 2006 Oct;81(10 Suppl):S56-60
pubmed: 17001137
Med Educ. 2012 Apr;46(4):409-16
pubmed: 22429177
Am J Surg. 1997 Mar;173(3):226-30
pubmed: 9124632
N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 21;355(25):2664-9
pubmed: 17182991
Med Educ. 2013 Feb;47(2):198-209
pubmed: 23323659
Br J Surg. 1997 Feb;84(2):273-8
pubmed: 9052454
BMJ. 2004 Jun 26;328(7455):1561-3
pubmed: 15217878
Simul Healthc. 2018 Feb;13(1):3-10
pubmed: 29117091
Teach Learn Med. 2019 Oct-Dec;31(5):528-535
pubmed: 30990131