Simulation-Based Training for Residents in the Management of Acute Agitation: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Simulations are used extensively in medicine to train clinicians to manage high-risk situations. However, to our knowledge, no studies have determined whether this is an effective means of teaching residents to manage acutely agitated patients. This study aimed to determine whether simulation-based training in the management of acute agitation improves resident knowledge and performance, as compared to didactic-based instruction. METHODS: Following a standard lecture on the management of agitated patients, first-year psychiatry residents were randomized (in clusters of three to four residents) to either the intervention (n = 15) or control arm (n = 11). Residents in the intervention arm then received simulation-based training on the management of acute agitation using a scenario with an agitated standardized patient. Those in the control arm received simulation-based training on a clinical topic unrelated to the management of agitation using a scenario with a non-agitated standardized patient who had suffered a fall. Baseline confidence and knowledge were assessed using pre-intervention self-assessment questionnaires and open-ended clinical case vignettes. Efficacy of the intervention as a teaching tool was assessed with post-intervention open-ended clinical case vignettes and videotaped simulation-based assessment, using a different scenario of an agitated standardized patient. RESULTS: Residents who received the agitation simulation-based training showed significantly greater improvement in knowledge (intervention = 3.0 vs. control = 0.3, p = 0.007, Cohen's d = 1.2) and performance (intervention = 39.6 vs control = 32.5, p = 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.6). Change in self-perceived confidence did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, simulation-based training appeared to be more effective at teaching knowledge and skills necessary for the management of acutely agitated patients, as compared to didactic-based instruction alone. Subjective evaluations of confidence in these skills did not improve significantly compared to controls, corroborating the need for using objective outcome measures when assessing simulation-based training.

Clinical Case Vignettes: A Promising Tool to Assess Competence in the Management of Agitation.

OBJECTIVE: While standardized patients (SPs) remain the gold standard for assessing clinical competence in a standardized setting, clinical case vignettes that allow free-text, open-ended written responses are more resource- and time-efficient assessment tools. It remains unknown, however, whether this is a valid method for assessing competence in the management of agitation. METHODS: Twenty-six psychiatry residents partook in a randomized controlled study evaluating a simulation-based teaching intervention on the management of agitated patients. Competence in the management of agitation was assessed using three separate modalities: simulation with SPs, open-ended clinical vignettes, and self-report questionnaires. RESULTS: Performance on clinical vignettes correlated significantly with SP-based assessments (r = 0.59, p = 0.002); self-report questionnaires that assessed one's own ability to manage agitation did not correlate with SP-based assessments (r = -0.06, p = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized clinical vignettes may be a simple, time-efficient, and valid tool for assessing residents' competence in the management of agitation.

Required and Elective Experiences During the 4th Year: An Analysis of ACGME Accredited Psychiatry Residency Program Websites.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess and describe required and elective components of the 4th post-graduate year (PGY4) in psychiatry residency programs. METHODS: We reviewed the websites of all 193 2014-2015 ACGME accredited psychiatry residency programs for content describing the specific components of the PGY4 year. RESULTS: Nearly all residency programs (99 %) had some form of required experiences during the PGY4 year. Ninety-four percent had clinical requirements for PGY4 residents, with longitudinal outpatient clinic being the most common (77 %). All programs offered some elective time during PGY4, but the amount of time ranged from 2 months to 100 %. CONCLUSION: Virtually all residency programs include some requirements in the 4th year (most commonly didactics and outpatient clinic) in addition to a broad array of elective experiences. Although 3 years may suffice for residents to complete ACGME requirements, a variety of factors may motivate programs to include required 4th year curricula. Future studies should explore the rationales for and possible benefits of programmatic requirements throughout 4 versus only 3 years of psychiatric training.