Search

The acquisition and maintenance of individual competency is a critical component of effective emergency care systems. This article summarizes consensus working group deliberations and recommendations focusing on the topic "Simulation-based education to ensure provider competency within the healthcare system." The authors presented this work for discussion and feedback at the 2017 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference on "Catalyzing System Change Through Healthcare Simulation: Systems, Competency, and Outcomes," held on May 16, 2017, in Orlando, Florida. Although simulation-based training is a quality and safety imperative in other high-reliability professions such as aviation, nuclear power, and the military, health care professions still lag behind in applying simulation more broadly. This is likely a result of a number of factors, including cost, assessment challenges, and resistance to change. This consensus subgroup focused on identifying current gaps in knowledge and process related to the use of simulation for developing, enhancing, and maintaining individual provider competency. The resulting product is a research agenda informed by expert consensus and literature review., (© 2017 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Simulation-based education has grown significantly over the past 10 years. As a result, more professional organizations are developing or implementing accreditation processes to help define minimum standards and best practices in simulation-based training. However, the benefits and potential pitfalls of sponsoring and implementing such programs have yet to be fully evaluated across specialties. The board of directors of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) requested an evaluation of the potential to create an emergency medicine (EM)-based Simulation Consultation and Accreditation Service. In response to this request, the Simulation Accreditation and Consultation Work Group, a subgroup of the Committee on Technology in Medical Education (now Simulation Academy), was created. The work group was charged with: 1) reviewing current benchmarks and standards set by existing simulation accreditation programs; 2) analyzing current EM simulation program structures, including leadership, administrative, and financial components; and 3) proposing a potential model for EM-based simulation accreditation. This article outlines currently existing and proposed accreditation models and identifies components that support best practices. It then goes on to describe three general programmatic models to better understand how simulation training can be operationalized in EM. Finally, the work group uses this collective information to propose how an accreditation process, in concert with the SAEM Simulation Consultation Service, can enhance and advance EM simulation training., (© 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: The use of medical simulation has grown dramatically over the past decade, yet national data on the prevalence and growth of use among individual specialty training programs are lacking. The objectives of this study were to describe the current role of simulation training in emergency medicine (EM) residency programs and to quantify growth in use of the technology over the past 5 years., Methods: In follow-up of a 2006 study (2003 data), the authors distributed an updated survey to program directors (PDs) of all 179 EM residency programs operating in early 2008 (140 Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education [ACGME]-approved allopathic programs and 39 American Osteopathic Association [AOA]-accredited osteopathic programs). The brief survey borrowed from the prior instrument, was edited and revised, and then distributed at a national PDs meeting. Subsequent follow-up was conducted by e-mail and telephone. The survey concentrated on technology-enhanced simulation modalities beyond routine static trainers or standardized patient-actors (high-fidelity mannequin simulation, part-task/procedural simulation, and dynamic screen-based simulation)., Results: A total of 134 EM residency programs completed the updated survey, yielding an overall response rate of 75%. A total of 122 (91%) use some form of simulation in their residency training. One-hundred fourteen (85%) specifically use mannequin-simulators, compared to 33 (29%) in 2003 (p < 0.001). Mannequin-simulators are now owned by 58 (43%) of the programs, whereas only 9 (8%) had primary responsibility for such equipment in 2003 (p < 0.001). Fifty-eight (43%) of the programs reported that annual resident simulation use now averages more than 10 hours per year., Conclusions: Use of medical simulation has grown significantly in EM residency programs in the past 5 years and is now widespread among training programs across the country.

Health care simulation includes a variety of educational techniques used to complement actual patient experiences with realistic yet artificial exercises. This field is rapidly growing and is widely used in emergency medicine (EM) graduate medical education (GME) programs. We describe the state of simulation in EM resident education, including its role in learning and assessment. The use of medical simulation in GME is increasing for a number of reasons, including the limitations of the 80-hour resident work week, patient dissatisfaction with being "practiced on," a greater emphasis on patient safety, and the importance of early acquisition of complex clinical skills. Simulation-based assessment (SBA) is advancing to the point where it can revolutionize the way clinical competence is assessed in residency training programs. This article also discusses the design of simulation centers and the resources available for developing simulation programs in graduate EM education. The level of interest in these resources is evident by the numerous national EM organizations with internal working groups focusing on simulation. In the future, the health care system will likely follow the example of the airline industry, nuclear power plants, and the military, making rigorous simulation-based training and evaluation a routine part of education and practice.

Medical simulation is a rapidly expanding area within medical education. In 2005, the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Simulation Task Force was created to ensure that the Society and its members had adequate access to information and resources regarding this new and important topic. One of the objectives of the task force was to create a research agenda for the use of simulation in emergency medical education. The authors present here the consensus document from the task force regarding suggested areas for research. These include opportunities to study reflective experiential learning, behavioral and team training, procedural simulation, computer screen-based simulation, the use of simulation for evaluation and testing, and special topics in emergency medicine. The challenges of research in the field of simulation are discussed, including the impact of simulation on patient safety. Outcomes-based research and multicenter efforts will serve to advance simulation techniques and encourage their adoption.

Objectives: To critically analyze the experience of clinical clerkship students exposed to simulator-based teaching, in order to better understand student perspectives on its utility., Methods: A convenience sample of clinical students (n = 95) rotating through an emergency medicine, surgery, or longitudinal patient-doctor clerkship voluntarily participated in a 2-hour simulator-based teaching session. Groups of 3-5 students managed acute scenarios including respiratory failure, myocardial infarction, or multisystem trauma. After the session, students completed a brief written evaluation asking for free text commentary on the strengths and weaknesses of the experience; they also provided simple satisfaction ratings. Using a qualitative research approach, the textual commentary was transcribed and parsed into fragments, coded for emergent themes, and tested for inter-rater agreement., Results: Six major thematic categories emerged from the qualitative analysis: The "Knowledge & Curriculum" domain was described by 35% of respondents, who commented on the opportunity for self-assessment, recall and memory, basic and clinical science learning, and motivation. "Applied Cognition and Critical Thought" was highlighted by 53% of respondents, who commented on the value of decision-making, active thought, clinical integration, and the uniqueness of learning-by-doing. "Teamwork and Communication" and "Procedural/Hands-On Skills" were each mentioned by 12% of subjects. Observations on the "Teaching/Learning Environment" were offered by 80% of students, who commented on the realism, interactivity, safety, and emotionality of the experience; here they also offered feedback on format, logistics, and instructors. Finally, "Suggestions for Use/Place in Undergraduate Medical Education" were provided by 22% of subjects, who primarily recommended more exposure. On a simple rating scale, 94% of students rated the quality of the simulator session as "excellent," whereas 91% felt the exercises should be "mandatory.", Conclusion: Full-body simulation promises to address a wide range of pedagogical objectives using a unified educational platform. Students value experiential "practice without risk" and want more exposure to simulation. In this study, students thought that that an integrated simulation exercise could help solidify knowledge across domains, foster critical thought and action, enhance technical-procedural skills, and promote effective teamwork and communication.

Objective: To compare simulator-based teaching with traditional instruction among clinical medical students., Methods: Randomized controlled trial with written pre-post testing. Third-year medical students (n = 38) received either a myocardial infarction (MI) simulation followed by a reactive airways disease (RAD) lecture, or a RAD simulation followed by an MI lecture., Results: Mean pre-post test score improvement was seen across teaching modalities (overall change score [simulation] = 8.8 [95% CI = 2.3-15.3], pretest [62.7]; change score [lecture] = 11.3 [95% CI = 5.7-16.9], pretest [59.7]). However, no significant differences were observed between simulator-based teaching and lecture, in either subject domain., Conclusions: After a single instructional session for clinical medical students, differences between simulator-based teaching and lecture could not be established by the written test protocols used in this pilot. Future studies should consider the effects of iterative exposure assessed by clinical performance measures across multiple centers.

Unlabelled: The concept of "learning by doing" has become less acceptable, particularly when invasive procedures and high-risk care are required. Restrictions on medical educators have prompted them to seek alternative methods to teach medical knowledge and gain procedural experience. Fortunately, the last decade has seen an explosion of the number of tools available to enhance medical education: web-based education, virtual reality, and high fidelity patient simulation. This paper presents some of the consensus statements in regard to these tools agreed upon by members of the Educational Technology Section of the 2004 AEM Consensus Conference for Informatics and Technology in Emergency Department Health Care, held in Orlando, Florida., Findings: Web-based teaching: 1) Every ED should have access to medical educational materials via the Internet, computer-based training, and other effective education methods for point-of-service information, continuing medical education, and training. 2) Real-time automated tools should be integrated into Emergency Department Information Systems [EDIS] for contemporaneous education. Virtual reality [VR]: 1) Emergency physicians and emergency medicine societies should become more involved in VR development and assessment. 2) Nationally accepted protocols for the proper assessment of VR applications should be adopted and large multi-center groups should be formed to perform these studies. High-fidelity simulation: Emergency medicine residency programs should consider the use of high-fidelity patient simulators to enhance the teaching and evaluation of core competencies among trainees., Conclusions: Across specialties, patient simulation, virtual reality, and the Web will soon enable medical students and residents to... see one, simulate many, do one competently, and teach everyone.

Purpose: To understand the responses of medical students and educators to high-fidelity patient simulation, a new technology allowing "practice without risk.", Method: Pilot groups of students (n = 27) and educators (n = 33) were exposed to a simulator session, then surveyed with multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Open-ended comments were transcribed and coded. They were analyzed for recurring themes and tested for inter-rater agreement. An independent focus group subsequently performed higher-level thematic analysis., Results: Overall, 85% of the students rated the session excellent and 85% of the educators rated it excellent or very good. Over 80% of both groups thought that simulator-based training should be required for all medical students. Analytic categories derived from written comments were: Overall Assessment (i.e., "generally good experience"); Process Descriptors (i.e., "very realistic"); Teaching Utility (i.e., "broad educational tool"); Pedagogic Efficacy (i.e., "promotes critical thinking"); and Goals for Future Use (i.e., "more practice sessions"). Thirty percent of students and 38% of educators were impressed by the realism of the simulator, and they (37% and 25%, respectively) identified the ability to "practice" medicine as the primary advantage of simulation. The focus group rated cost as the major current disadvantage (66%)., Conclusions: Students' and educators' responses to high-fidelity patient simulation were very positive. The ability to practice without risk must be weighed against the cost of this new technology.