Simulation in training: one-year experience using an efficiency index to assess interventional radiology fellow training status

PURPOSE: To compare objective fellow and expert efficiency indices for an interventional radiology renal artery stenosis skill set with the use of a high-fidelity simulator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Mentice VIST simulator was used for three different renal artery stenosis simulations of varying difficulty, which were used to grade performance. Fellows' indices at three intervals throughout 1 year were compared to expert baseline performance. Seventy-four simulated procedures were performed, 63 of which were captured as audiovisual recordings. Three levels of fellow experience were analyzed: 1, 6, and 12 months of dedicated interventional radiology fellowship. The recordings were compiled on a computer workstation and analyzed. Distinct measurable events in the procedures were identified with task analysis, and data regarding efficiency were extracted. Total scores were calculated as the product of procedure time, fluoroscopy time, tools, and contrast agent volume. The lowest scores, which reflected efficient use of tools, radiation, and time, were considered to indicate proficiency. Subjective analysis of participants' procedural errors was not included in this analysis. RESULTS: Fellows' mean scores diminished from 1 month to 12 months (42,960 at 1 month, 18,726 at 6 months, and 9,636 at 12 months). The experts' mean score was 4,660. In addition, the range of variance in score diminished with increasing experience (from a range of 5,940-120,156 at 1 month to 2,436-85,272 at 6 months and 2,160-32,400 at 12 months). Expert scores ranged from 1,450 to 10,800. CONCLUSIONS: Objective efficiency indices for simulated procedures can demonstrate scores directly comparable to the level of clinical experience.

FE-Simulation in der klinischen Osteoporoseforschung

Altersbedingte Osteoporose erhöht des Frakturrisiko. Übliche Diagnoseverfahren basieren auf DXA. Leider sind diese ungenau und erklären oft nicht die Effekte von Behandlungen. Eine neue Methode zur Bestimmung der Knochenfestigkeit beginnt derzeit, sich zu etablieren – die Finite-Elemente-Methode (FEM). Diese universelle, im Bereich der Technik weit verbreitete, Methode erlaubt es, die Diagnose und den Behandlungserfolg besser vorauszusagen als DXA. CT-basierende FE-Modelle sind stark von der Bildauflösung abhängig. In diesem Überblicksartikel werden drei unterschiedliche Modelltypen (μCT, HR-pQCT, QCT) vorgestellt und die Ergebnisse von densitometrischen und FE-Analysen verglichen. Dabei waren die FE-Ergebnisse den densitometrischen immer überlegen. Darüber hinaus erlaubt die FEM die Angabe eines biomechanischen Frakturrisikos. Dieser Vorteil der FE-Methode muss jedoch im Licht der höheren Röntgendosen und Betriebskosten der CT-Bildgebung betrachtet werden. Zukünftig wird die FE-Methode klinisch eine weite Verbreitung finden – die Frage ist nur wann und wie!

Simulation in vascular access surgery

In the last years, simulation training has become widespread in different areas of medicine due to social expectations, political accountability and professional regulation. Different types of simulators allow to improve knowledge, skills, communication and team behavior. Simulation sessions have been proven to shorten the learning curve and allow education in a safe environment. Patients on dialysis are an expanding group. They often suffer from several comorbidities and need complex surgical procedures with regard to their dialysis access. Therefore, education in evidence-based algorithms is as important as teaching of practical skills. In this chapter, we are presenting an overview of available dialysis access training modalities. We are convinced that simulation will become more important in the near future and has a substantial impact on strategies to improve aspects of patient safety. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Simulation in vascular access surgery training.

Rapidly growing technical developments and working time constraints call for changes in trainee formation. In reality, trainees spend fewer hours in the hospital and face more difficulties in acquiring the required qualifications in order to work independently as a specialist. Simulation-based training is a potential solution. It offers the possibility to learn basic technical skills, repeatedly perform key steps in procedures and simulate challenging scenarios in team training. Patients are not at risk and learning curves can be shortened. Advanced learners are able to train rare complications. Senior faculty member's presence is key to assess and debrief effective simulation training. In the field of vascular access surgery, simulation models are available for open as well as endovascular procedures. In this narrative review, we describe the theory of simulation, present simulation models in vascular (access) surgery, discuss the possible benefits for patient safety and the difficulties of implementing simulation in training.

Simulation aus Fleisch und Blut: Schauspielpatienten

Der Begriff der Simulation wird manchmal vorschnell auf technische Simulatoren reduziert, welche mehr oder weniger aufwändig Anatomien oder bestimmte Szenarien des klinischen Alltages wiedergeben. In dem folgenden Kapitel soll nun der Begriff Simulation auch auf die sogenannten Simulationspatienten ausgeweitet und entsprechende Konzepte vorgestellt werde

FAIR_OSCE – Feedback structure for assessment of interactive roleplay in Objective Structured Clinical Exams

Introduction Since the quality of patient portrayal of standardized patients (SPs) during an Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) has a major impact on the reliability and validity of the exam, quality control should be initiated. Literature about quality control of SPs’ performance focuses on feedback [1, 2] or completion of checklists [3, 4]. Since we did not find a published instrument meeting our needs for the assessment of patient portrayal, we developed such an instrument after being inspired by others [5] and used it in our high-stakes exam. Project description SP trainers from five medical faculties collected and prioritized quality criteria for patient portrayal. Items were revised twice, based on experiences during OSCEs. The final instrument contains 14 criteria for acting (i.e. adequate verbal and non-verbal expression) and standardization (i.e. verbatim delivery of the first sentence). All partners used the instrument during a high-stakes OSCE. SPs and trainers were introduced to the instrument. The tool was used in training (more than 100 observations) and during the exam (more than 250 observations). Outcome High quality of SPs’ patient portrayal during the exam was documented. More than 90% of SP performances were rated to be completely correct or sufficient. An increase in quality of performance between training and exam was noted. For example, the rate of completely correct reaction in medical tests increased from 88% to 95%. Together with 4% of sufficient performances these 95% add up to 99% of the reactions in medical tests meeting the standards of the exam. SP educators using the instrument reported an augmentation of SPs’ performance induced by the use of the instrument. Disadvantages mentioned were the high concentration needed to observe all criteria and the cumbersome handling of the paper-based forms. Discussion We were able to document a very high quality of SP performance in our exam. The data also indicates that our training is effective. We believe that the high concentration needed using the instrument is well invested, considering the observed enhancement of performance. The development of an iPad-based application for the form is planned to address the cumbersome handling of the paper.

Quality assurance of simulated patient feedback in communication training for fourth-year medical students

Introduction In our program, simulated patients (SPs) give feedback to medical students in the course of communication skills training. To ensure effective training, quality control of the SPs’ feedback should be implemented. At other institutions, medical students evaluate the SPs’ feedback for quality control (Bouter et al., 2012). Thinking about implementing quality control for SPs’ feedback in our program, we wondered whether the evaluation by students would result in the same scores as evaluation by experts. Methods Consultations simulated by 4th-year medical students with SPs were video taped including the SP’s feedback to the students (n=85). At the end of the training sessions students rated the SPs’ performance using a rating instrument called Bernese Assessment for Role-play and Feedback (BARF) containing 11 items concerning feedback quality. Additionally the videos were evaluated by 3 trained experts using the BARF. Results The experts showed a high interrater agreement when rating identical feedbacks (ICCunjust=0.953). Comparing the rating of students and experts, high agreement was found with regard to the following items: 1. The SP invited the student to reflect on the consultation first, Amin (= minimal agreement) 97% 2. The SP asked the student what he/she liked about the consultation, Amin = 88%. 3. The SP started with positive feedback, Amin = 91%. 4. The SP was comparing the student with other students, Amin = 92%. In contrast the following items showed differences between the rating of experts and students: 1. The SP used precise situations for feedback, Amax (=maximal agreement) 55%, Students rated 67 of SPs’ feedbacks to be perfect with regard to this item (highest rating on a 5 point Likert scale), while only 29 feedbacks were rated this way by the experts. 2. The SP gave precise suggestions for improvement, Amax 75%, 62 of SPs’ feedbacks obtained the highest rating from students, while only 44 of SPs’ feedbacks achieved the highest rating in the view of the experts. 3. The SP speaks about his/her role in the third person, Amax 60%. Students rated 77 feedbacks with the highest score, while experts judged only 43 feedbacks this way. Conclusion Although evaluation by the students was in agreement with that of experts concerning some items, students rated the SPs’ feedback more often with the optimal score than experts did. Moreover it seems difficult for students to notice when SPs talk about the role in the first instead of the third person. Since precision and talking about the role in the third person are important quality criteria of feedback, this result should be taken into account when thinking about students’ evaluation of SPs’ feedback for quality control. Bouter, S., E. van Weel-Baumgarten, and S. Bolhuis. 2012. Construction and Validation of the Nijmegen Evaluation of the Simulated Patient (NESP): Assessing Simulated Patients’ Ability to Role-Play and Provide Feedback to Students. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges