RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Simulation-based education (SBE) has been increasingly used to train healthcare workers in low-resource settings and has been endorsed by the World Health Organization (WHO). Consideration of the educational and cultural context is important to maximize the effectiveness of SBE. Despite its demonstrable benefits, there have been no studies of the general approach in the Pacific Islands. This study aimed to determine the factors that influence the uptake and success of SBE in the Pacific Islands. METHODS: In this qualitative study, participants were recruited via professional networks to contribute to focus groups. Questions focused on participants' previous experiences and perspectives on SBE. Data were manually transcribed before thematic analysis. The reporting of the research was guided by the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). Human Research Ethics Committee approval was obtained. RESULTS: Two focus groups were conducted with 16 participants from six Pacific Island countries. Six themes and 15 subthemes were conceptualized from the data. Uptake of SBE is challenged by resource availability, clinical workloads and geographic remoteness. However, locally-driven solutions and positive attitudes towards SBE facilitate its success. CONCLUSION: This study reveals the complexity of factors affecting the uptake and success of SBE in the Pacific Islands. These findings can serve to optimize the impact of existing and future SBE programmes and may be considered by educators prior to programme implementation.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic simulation is integral to surgical education but requires significant resources. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of dyadic practice (DP), involving two individuals working together, to individual practice (IP) for novices acquiring laparoscopic skills and assess their learning experience. METHODS: We conducted a Randomized Controlled Trial comparing DP and IP for novice medical students who completed a laparoscopic simulation workshop. Participants were assessed individually pre-course (test 1), post-course (test 2), and 8-week retention (test 3) using a validated quantitative method. A post-course questionnaire and interview, analyzed with thematic analysis, assessed the learning experience. RESULTS: In total, 31 DP and 35 IP participants completed the study. There was no difference in mean scores between DP and IP groups in all three tests: test 1 (p = 0.55), test 2 (p = 0.26), test 3 (p = 0.35). In trend analysis, the DP group improved post-course (test 1 vs. 2: p = 0.02) and maintained this level at the retention test (2 vs. 3: p = 0.80, 1 vs. 3: p = 0.02). Whilst the IP group also improved post-course (test 1 vs. 2: p < 0.001), this improvement was not retained (2 vs. 3: p = 0.003, 1 vs. 3: p = 0.32). Thematic analysis revealed that DP participants valued peer support, peer feedback and observation time, but also acknowledged the limitations of reduced practical time and issues with teamwork. CONCLUSION: DP is non-inferior to IP for novices learning laparoscopic skills, is well received and may lead to superior long-term skill retention.