4.6 Article

Comparison of multimodal active learning and single-modality procedural simulation for central venous catheter insertion for incoming residents in anesthesiology: a prospective and randomized study

期刊

BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12909-022-03437-0

关键词

Active learning; Central venous catheter; Flipped classroom; Simulation; Peyton's 4-step; Kirkpatrick

资金

  1. Agence Regionale de Sante d'Ile de France (ARS-IDF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A study was conducted to evaluate the combined effects of flipped classroom and modified Peyton's method on procedural learning in central venous catheter insertion training. The results showed that a multimodal active learning strategy did not provide better outcomes compared to traditional simulation methods. Satisfaction and perceived improvement in theoretical and practical knowledge were high in both groups after training.
Background Active learning methods, including low-fidelity simulation, are useful but the incremental learning effect of each method is however limited. We designed this study to assess if combining flipped classroom and the modified Peyton's << 4-steps >> method during procedural simulation (intervention group [IG]) would provide better learning results than simulation alone (control group [CG]) in the context of central venous catheter insertion training. Methods This prospective, single-center, and randomized study took place in 2017 in a single simulation center. All first year Anesthesiology residents of Ile de France area at the start of their residency were randomly included either in the IG or CG during a seminar aimed at providing initial procedural skills with low-fidelity simulation. A composite learning score which included knowledge MCQ and a questionnaire assessing satisfaction and value of the training session was recorded after training (primary outcome, /100). A randomized sub-group of learners of each group were video-recorded during central venous catheter insertion at the end of training and their skills were evaluated with validated tools, including a specific checklist and a global rating scale (GRS). Results Among 89 anesthesiology residents, 48 and 41 learners were randomized in the intervention and control groups respectively. Of the IG residents, 40/48 (83%) had read the learning material prior to the session. There was no significant difference regarding the composite outcome ([IG]= 81.1 vs [CG] = 80.5 /100 (p = 0.68)). Results of the post-session MCQ knowledge questionnaire were also non-significantly different. Residents were similarly satisfied and described a significant improvement of their knowledge and skills after training. Learners highly valued the training session as a mean to improve their future practice. No significant differences regarding checklist and GRS scores were observed. Conclusions A multimodal active learning strategy of procedural learning did not provide better learning outcomes when compared to a traditional simulation method. In both groups, satisfaction was high and perception of the acquired theoretical and practical knowledge was improved after training.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据