Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions

Research articles

Simulation-based training using a novel Surabaya hysterectomy mannequin following video demonstration to improve abdominal hysterectomy skills of obstetrics and gynecology residents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia: a pre- and post-intervention study: Dara Dasawulansari Syamsuri, Brahmana Askandar Tjokroprawiro, Eighty Mardiyan Kurniawati, Budi Utomo, Djoko Kuswanto; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2022;19:11. Published online May 17, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2022.19.11

2,480 View
268 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose
During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the number of abdominal hysterectomy procedures decreased in Indonesia. The existing commercial abdominal hysterectomy simulation model is expensive and difficult to reuse. This study compared residents’ abdominal hysterectomy skills after simulation-based training using the Surabaya hysterectomy mannequin following a video demonstration.
Methods
We randomized 3rd- and 4th-year obstetrics and gynecology residents to a video-based group (group 1), a simulation-based group (group 2), and a combination group (group 3). Abdominal hysterectomy skills were compared between before and after the educational intervention. The pre- and post-tests were scored by blinded experts using the validated Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Global Rating Scale (GRS).
Results
A total of 33 residents were included in the pre- and post-tests. The OSATS and GRS mean differences after the intervention were higher in group 3 than in groups 1 and 2 (OSATS: 4.64 [95% CI, 2.90–6.37] vs. 2.55 [95% CI, 2.19–2.90] vs. 3.82 [95% CI, 2.41–5.22], P=0.047; GRS: 10.00 [95% CI, 7.01–12.99] vs. 5.18 [95% CI, 3.99–6.38] vs. 7.18 [95% CI, 6.11–8.26], P=0.006). The 3rd-year residents in group 3 had greater mean differences in OSATS and GRS scores than the 4th-year residents (OSATS: 5.67 [95% CI, 2.88–8.46]; GRS: 12.83 [95% CI, 8.61–17.05] vs. OSATS: 3.40 [95% CI, 0.83–5.97]; GRS: 5.67 [95% CI, 2.80–8.54]).
Conclusion
Simulation-based training using the Surabaya hysterectomy mannequin following video demonstration can be a bridge to learning about abdominal hysterectomy for residents who had less surgical experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Obstetrics and gynecology residents’ satisfaction and self-confidence after an anal sphincter injury simulation-based workshop in Indonesia: a pre- and post-intervention comparison study: Riska Wahyuningtyas, Eighty Mardiyan Kurniawati, Budi Utomo, Gatut Hardianto, Hari Paraton, Tri Hastono, Djoko Kuswanto; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2022;19:4. Published online February 14, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2022.19.4

3,288 View
412 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose
Obstetric anal sphincter injury is one of the most common complications during delivery. Simulation models with manikins can be used as an effective medical learning method to improve students’ abilities before encountering patients. The present study aimed to describe the development of an anal sphincter injury model and to assess residents’ satisfaction and self-confidence after a perineal repair workshop with an anal sphincter injury simulator in Indonesia.
Methods
This was a cross-sectional study with evaluation of outcomes before and after the workshop. We created a silicone-latex simulation anal sphincter injury model. Then, we validated this simulation and used it as a simulation model for the workshop. We asked residents about their satisfaction with repairing anal sphincter injuries using a simulation model and residents’ self-confidence when practicing anal sphincter injury repair.
Results
All residents felt the simulation-based workshop was valuable (100%). Most of the scores for the similarity of the simulation model were good (about 8 out of maximum 10). The self-assessment of confidence was measured before and after the workshop. Overall self-confidence increased significantly after the workshop in identifying the external sphincter ani (EAS) (P=0.031), suturing the anal mucosa (P=0.001), suturing the internal sphincter ani (P=0.001), suturing the EAS (P<0.001), and evaluating the sphincter ani tone (P=0.016).
Conclusion
The anal sphincter injury simulator improved residents’ self-confidence in identifying the EAS, suturing the anal mucosa, suturing the internal sphincter ani, suturing the EAS, and evaluating sphincter ani tone.

Comparison of the use of manikins and simulated patients in a multidisciplinary in situ medical simulation program for healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom: Marrit Meerdink, Joshua Khan; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2021;18:8. Published online April 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2021.18.8

4,752 View
314 Download
4 Citations

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Purpose
Simulation training is increasingly popular in healthcare education, and often relies on specially designed manikins. However, it is also possible to work with actors, or simulated patients (SPs), which may provide a greater sense of realism. This study aimed to compare these 2 approaches, to ascertain which makes healthcare professionals feel most comfortable, which leads to the greatest improvement in confidence, and which is most beneficial to learning.
Methods
This study was embedded in a pre-existing multidisciplinary in situ simulation program. A multidisciplinary group of learners from a range of backgrounds—including nurses, doctors, and other allied health professionals—were asked to complete a questionnaire about their learning preferences. We collected 204 responses from 40 simulation sessions over 4 months, from September to December 2019. Of these 204 responses, 123 described using an SP and 81 described using a manikin.
Results
We found that 58% of respondents believed they would feel more comfortable working with an actor, while 17% would feel more comfortable using a manikin. Learners who used both modalities reported a significant increase in confidence (P<0.0001 for both). Participants felt that both modalities were beneficial to learning, but SPs provided significantly more benefits to learning than manikins (P<0.0001). The most common reason favoring SP-based simulation was the greater realism.
Conclusion
In scenarios that could reasonably be provided using either modality, we suggest that educators should give greater consideration to using SP-based simulation.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Perception of Realism and Acquisition of Clinical Skills in Simulated Pediatric Dentistry Scenarios
Begoña Bartolomé Villar, Irene Real Benlloch, Ana De la Hoz Calvo, Gleyvis Coro-Montanet
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 19(18): 11387. CrossRef
Just-in-Time Orientation of Non-Critical Care Nurses to the Critical Care Environment
Meghan Doelger, Karen Kesten, Bonnie Sakallaris
The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing.2022; 53(10): 465. CrossRef
Content validity test of a safety checklist for simulated participants in simulation-based education in the United Kingdom: a methodological study
Matthew Bradley
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 21. CrossRef
A manikin or human simulator—development of a tool for measuring students’ perception
Kamil Torres, Phillip Evans, Izabela Mamcarz, Natalia Radczuk, Anna Torres
PeerJ.2022; 10: e14214. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search