1. The effects of active (hot-seat) versus observer roles during simulation-based training on stress levels and non-technical performance: a randomized trial
- Author
-
Su Min Lee, John Carson Allen, Evangeline H. L. Lim, Arpana R. Vidyarthi, Agnes Suah Bwee Ng, and Choon Looi Bong
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Stress ,law.invention ,Stress level ,Fight-or-flight response ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Randomized controlled trial ,law ,Hot-seat ,Clinical endpoint ,Non-technical performance ,Medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Observers ,Simulation based ,Salivary cortisol ,business.industry ,Research ,030208 emergency & critical care medicine ,General Medicine ,Observer (special relativity) ,Technical performance ,Physical therapy ,business ,Social psychology ,Simulation - Abstract
Background Active ‘hands-on’ participation in the ‘hot-seat’ during immersive simulation-based training (SBT) induces stress for participants, which is believed to be necessary to improve performance. We hypothesized that observers of SBT can subsequently achieve an equivalent level of non-technical performance as ‘hot-seat’ participants despite experiencing lower stress. Methods We randomized 37 anaesthesia trainees into two groups to undergo three consecutive SBT scenarios. Eighteen ‘hot-seat’ trainees actively participated in all three scenarios, and 19 ‘observer’ trainees were directed to observe the first two scenarios and participated in the ‘hot-seat’ only in scenario 3. Salivary cortisol (SC) was measured at four time points during each scenario. Primary endpoint for stress response was the change in SC (ΔSC) from baseline. Performance was measured using the Anaesthetist’s Non-Technical Skills (ANTS) Score. Results Mean SC increased in all participants whenever they were in the ‘hot-seat’ role, but not when in the observer role. Hot-seat ΔSC (mcg/dL) for scenarios 1, 2, and 3 were 0.122 (p = 0.001), 0.074 (p = 0.047), and 0.085 (p = 0.023), respectively. Observers ΔSC (mcg/dL) for scenarios 1, 2, and 3 were −0.062 (p = 0.091), 0.010 (p = 0.780), and 0.144 (p = 0.001), respectively. Mean ANTS scores were equivalent between the ‘hot-seat’ (40.0) and ‘observer’ (39.4) groups in scenario 3 (p = 0.733). Conclusions Observers of SBT achieved an equivalent level of non-technical performance, while experiencing lower stress than trainees repeatedly trained in the ‘hot-seat’. Our findings suggest that directed observers may benefit from immersive SBT even without repeated ‘hands-on’ experience and stress in the hot-seat. The directed observer role may offer a less stressful, practical alternative to the traditional ‘hot-seat’ role, potentially rendering SBT accessible to a wider audience. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02211378, registered August 5, 2014, retrospectively registered. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s41077-017-0040-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
- Full Text
- View/download PDF