Search

The COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing rules necessitated the suspension of all in-person learning activities at our institution. Consequently, distance learning became essential. We adapted a high-fidelity immersive case-based simulation scenario for telesimulation by using the virtual meeting platform Zoom® to meet our curricular needs. The use of telesimulation to teach a complex case-based scenario is novel. Two cohorts of anesthesiology residents participated 2 weeks apart. All learners were located at home. Four faculty members conducted the telesimulation from different locations within our simulation center in the roles of director, simulation operator, confederate anesthesiologist, and confederate surgeon. The anesthesiologist performed tasks as directed by learners. The scenario was divided into four scenes to permit reflection on interventions/actions by the participants based on the clinical events as the scenario progressed, to facilitate intermittent debriefing and learner engagement. All residents were given a medical knowledge pretest before the telesimulation and a posttest and learner satisfaction survey at the conclusion. The scenario was authentic and immersive, represented an actual case, and provided the opportunity to practice lessons that could be applied in the clinical setting. Participants rated telesimulation a reasonable substitution for in-person learning and expressed gratitude for continuation of their simulation-based education in this format during the pandemic. Participants in the second cohort reported feeling more engaged (p = 0.008) and stimulated to think critically (p = 0.003). Audio quality was the most frequently noted limitation. Fifty-three residents completed both pre- and posttests. The two cohorts did not differ in knowledge pretest scores (62% vs 60%, p = 0.80) or posttest scores (78% vs. 77%, p = 0.87). Overall, knowledge scores improved with the telesimulation intervention (pretest mean = 61% [SD = 14%]; posttest mean = 78% [SD = 12%]; t (41) = − 7.89, p < 0.001). Thus, using a Zoom format, we demonstrated the feasibility of adapting a complex case for telesimulation and effective knowledge gain. Furthermore, we improved our process in real time based on participant feedback. Participants were satisfied with their learning experience, suggesting that this format may be used in other distance learning situations.

Interest has been increasing in interprofessional education and collaboration (IPEC) within health professional schools over the last two decades. Although a growing body of literature addresses the effects of IPEC on healthcare outcomes, psychometrically sound attitudinal instruments that measure concepts surrounding IPEC are still needed. The primary objective of this study was to develop a scale to measure the attitudes of attending physicians and residents toward IPEC. Based on a literature review, a set of questionnaire items was drafted to address all six domains outlined in a World Health Organization report for interprofessional learning outcomes. These domains are teamwork and collaboration, roles and responsibilities, communication, reflection and learning, the patient, and ethics and attitudes. A total of 379 physicians and trainees completed the questionnaire. A principal axis factoring with orthogonal varimax rotation of 20 items produced a 5-factor solution explaining 60% of the variance. Examination of the items in each factor led to the following labels: 'teamwork and communication,' 'ethics and attitudes,' 'roles and responsibilities,' 'reflective practice,' and 'patient-centered care.' A Generalized Linear Model provided initial evidence that the new scale might detect shifts in attitudes related to some of the emergent factors.

BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is part of the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) certification process. A simulated OSCE can aid examination preparation, but the COVID-19 pandemic prevented in-person simulation training. Therefore, we adapted our in-person simulated OSCE (SOSCE) as a Zoom-based telesimulation OSCE (ZOSCE), permitting examinees to participate remotely. Comparing this process with historical in-person SOSCE cohorts, we hypothesized that this telesimulation-based format would still be well received by the trainees as a substitute when it was not possible to provide in-person practice and formative assessment. Subsequently, the ABA proposed a virtual-format OSCE. METHODS: We conducted our 7-station ZOSCE according to the ABA content outline for all graduating third-year clinical anesthesia residents (CA-3) in 2020. From a main meeting room, the facilitator paired each CA-3 with a faculty proctor, assigned them to their own breakout room for each station, and rotated standardized patients in. The faculty proctor observed the CA-3’s performance in real time using an assessment tool with objectives graded on a 0–2 scale. At the conclusion of the ZOSCE, proctors reviewed the assessment tool with the CA-3 and provided personalized global feedback. Assessment tool scores were used to calculate performance data for the study group that were compared with a SOSCE historical cohort from 2017 and 2018. All parties completed a Likert-style evaluation specific to the ZOSCE. RESULTS: A total of 22 CA-3 residents participated. Mean performance scores ranged from 82.2%–94.9% (minimum = 38%, maximum = 100%). Compared with the historical SOSCE cohort, ZOSCE scores for 5 of 7 stations were not different, but scores in communication with professionals (P = .007) and ultrasound (P < .001) stations were lower. Overall, CA-3 participants rated the learning experience positively and felt it was a reasonable substitution for in-person simulation, with responses similar to those of a historical in-person SOSCE cohort. CONCLUSIONS: A telesimulation-based practice ZOSCE for formative examination preparation for the ABA OSCE resulted in similar institutional scoring for most stations compared with in-person SOSCE, but some stations may be better practiced in person or require modifications. The virtual format may permit flexible scheduling during nonclinical times or for learners in remote locations. These findings have implications for future formative exercises and the formal summative examination process.

Within academic medical centers, there is increasing interest among physicians to pursue education as a promotion pathway. Many medical schools and universities offer professional development opportunities for these individuals such as workshops and certificate and advanced degree programs. However, there exists a need for a more personalized support for clinician-educators to be successful in educational scholarship in the health care setting. In 2017, a departmental level educational research community was established within Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine at Johns Hopkins University to support faculty, staff, and trainees in creating, completing, and publishing educational scholarship. The research infrastructure includes administrative and institutional review board submission assistance, internal grant support, database management, statistical analysis, and consultation with professional educators. Also, integral to the education core is monthly education lab meetings that allow an opportunity for education researchers to present work in progress, conceive new projects, discuss relevant literature, and cultivate and sustain a community of educational scholars.This innovation in education demonstrates feasibility at a departmental level to successfully support educational research. We have initiated education meetings with a cohort of core education faculty who are interested in an educational promotion track. We present several metrics that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the programs similar to this innovation.

Effectively communicating patient safety concerns in the operating theatre is crucial, but novice trainees often struggle to develop effective speaking up behaviour. Our primary objective was to test whether repeated simulation-based practice helps trainees speak up about patient management concerns. We also tested the effect of an additional didactic intervention over standard simulation education.This prospective observational study with a nested double-blind, randomised controlled component took place during a week-long simulation boot camp. Participants were randomised to receive simulation education (SE), or simulation education plus a didactic session on speaking up behaviour (SE+). Outcome measures were: changes in intrapersonal factors for speaking up (self-efficacy, social outcome expectations, and assertiveness), and speaking up performance during four simulated scenarios. Participants self-reported intrapersonal factors and blinded observers scored speaking up behaviour. Cognitive burden for each simulation was also measured using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index. Mixed-design analysis of variance was used to analyse scores.Twenty-two participants (11 per group) were included. There was no significant interaction between group and time for any outcome measure. There was a main effect for time for self-efficacy (P0.001); for social outcome expectations (P0.001); for assertive attitude (P=0.003); and for speaking up scores (P=0.001). The SE+ group's assertive attitude scores increased at follow-up whereas the SE group reverted to near baseline scores (P=0.025).In novice anaesthesia trainees, intrapersonal factors and communication performance benefit from repeated simulation training. Focused teaching may help trainees develop assertive behaviours.

BACKGROUND: In our current digital age, textbooks have been supplemented or supplanted by multiple online modalities for knowledge acquisition. Trainees, often from a younger generation than their program directors (PDs), prefer asynchronous options such as podcasts, videos, and question banks. We sought to identify whether an educational gap exists between PDs and trainees regarding what is assigned and what is used. METHODS: A national cross-sectional survey was conducted in the United States in 2018–2019 to characterize anesthesiology resident and PD perceptions of academic knowledge acquisition. RESULTS: Of the 149 PDs, 85 completed the survey (57%). Of the 85 PDs, 36 forwarded the survey to residents. Of the 1414 residents who received the survey, 503 residents responded to the survey (36%). The PDs thought residents used didactics, assigned reading, and scheduled simulations more than residents reported (P < .001). Residents reported using self-directed learning more (P = .004). Most residents (74.1%) reported using textbooks or online reading materials. Those residents reporting >70th percentile on the In-Training Exam used textbooks or online materials more than those who reported low scores (

Limited opportunity for teaching patient-care skills in clinical settings has increased the need for simulation training in medical education. However, this modality may be hard to sustain because of extensive time requirements and potential scheduling conflicts. The authors conducted a pilot randomized study to compare the immediate and long-term effects of using instructional video with self-directed practice to those of using simulation training with expert feedback. The results are promising for the use of instructional video–guided, self-directed deliberate practice; however, future studies with a larger sample from multiple institutions should replicate this study to confirm these results.

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of a learner-centered, simulation-based training developed to help medical students improve their procedural skills in intubation, arterial line placement, lumbar puncture, and central line insertion. Method: The study participants were second and third year medical students. Anesthesiology residents provided the training and evaluated students’ procedural skills. Two residents were present at each station to train the medical students who rotated through all 4 stations. Pre/posttraining assessment of confidence, knowledge, and procedural skills was done using a survey, a multiple-choice test, and procedural checklists, respectively. Results: In total, 24 students were trained in six 4-hour sessions. Students reported feeling significantly more confident, after training, in performing all 4 procedures on a real patient ( P < .001). Paired-samples t tests indicated statistically significant improvement in knowledge scores for intubation, t(23) = −2.92, P < .001, and arterial line placement, t(23) = −2.75, P < .001. Procedural performance scores for intubation ( t(23) = −17.29, P < .001), arterial line placement ( t(23) = −19.75, P < .001), lumbar puncture ( t(23) = −16.27, P < .001), and central line placement ( t(23) = −17.25, P < .001) showed significant improvement. Intraclass correlation coefficients indicated high reliability in checklist scores for all procedures. Conclusions: The simulation sessions allowed each medical student to receive individual attention from 2 residents for each procedure. Students’ written comments indicated that this training modality was well received. Results showed that medical students improved their self-confidence, knowledge, and skills in the aforementioned procedures.