Mannequin-based Telesimulation: Increasing Access to Simulation-based Education.

A telesimulation platform utilizes communications technology to provide mannequin-based simulation education between learners and instructors located remotely from one another. Specifically, the instructor controls the mannequin and moderates the debriefing remotely. During these sessions, the instructor observes the learners in real time and provides immediate feedback during the debriefing. This platform obviates the need to have instructors, learners, and mannequins in the same place at the same time, potentially allowing simulation-based educational sessions to occur with greater frequency for institutions not located proximate to formal simulation centers. Additionally, the telesimulation platform enables an experienced simulation instructor to observe and directly help new simulation instructors at remote simulation locations. Readily available Web-conferencing, screen-sharing software, microphones, and webcams makes telesimulation possible. Mannequin-based telesimulation is relatively new and not well represented in the literature, but could facilitate systems changes, providing educational experiences to health care professionals in locations not currently benefiting from mannequin-based simulation opportunities. Several research questions need to be addressed in future studies to better develop this educational approach, including technical feasibility, logistic issues, a comparison of telesimulation to other simulation approaches, and assessing limitations of the telesimulation platform.

A Pilot Study to Gauge Effectiveness of Standardized Patient Scenarios in Assessing General Surgery Milestones.

PURPOSE: Some General Surgery Milestones can be difficult to assess in traditional clinical settings and especially difficult to assess in junior residents. The purpose of this pilot study was to METHODS: A total of 9 categorical interns participated in a comprehensive, 4-module, SP scenario designed to evaluate and manage right upper quadrant pain. SP checklist scores (SP%) were converted to Milestone-equivalent scores for direct comparison (SP-C). Milestone scores were analyzed from 3 different sources: SP, faculty (FAC), and CCC. Interns completed course evaluations at the end of each session. Spearman's rho was used to determine correlations. Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to test for differences between scores from different sources. RESULTS: Individual intern Milestone scores from the 3 sources (SP-C, FAC, and CCC) did not correlate. All 7 mean Milestone scores from SPs were significantly higher than from FAC and CCC. FAC and CCC scores were statistically equivalent except for Systems-Based Practice 1 (SBP1) and Patient Care 3 (PC3) where CCC scores were significantly higher than FAC. Mean SP% scores for PC1 were significantly lower than for PROF1, MK1, MK2, and ICS1 (p < 0.05). Interns felt the modules were moderately to very useful. CONCLUSIONS: Developing an SP scenario for Milestones evaluation is feasible. SPs, faculty observers, and CCC each use different data to provide a unique source of Milestone assessment. SP scenarios may be ideally suited to assess specific resident strengths and weaknesses and provide individualized feedback, thus augmenting traditional evaluations. Additional SP scenarios, assessing a broader range of skills and Milestones, are advisable for more reliable estimates of resident performance.