27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The effect of simulator fidelity on procedure skill training: a literature review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To evaluate the effect of simulator fidelity on procedure skill training through a review of existing studies.

          Methods

          MEDLINE, OVID and EMBASE databases were searched between January 1990 and January 2019. Search terms included “simulator fidelity and comparison” and "low fidelity" and "high fidelity" and “comparison” and “simulator”. Author classification of low- and high-fidelity was used for non-laparoscopic procedures. Laparoscopic simulators are classified using a proposed schema. All included studies used a randomized methodology with two or more groups and were written in English. Data was abstracted to a standard data sheet and critically appraised from 17 eligible full papers.

          Results

          Of 17 studies, eight were for laparoscopic and nine for other skill training. Studies employed evaluation methodologies, including subjective and objective measures. The evaluation was conducted once in 13/17 studies and before-after in 4/17. Didactic training only or control groups were used in 5/17 studies, while 10/17 studies included two groups only. Skill acquisition and simulator fidelity were different for the level of training in 1/17 studies. Simulation training was followed by clinical evaluation or a live animal evaluation in 3/17 studies. Low-fidelity training was not inferior to training with a high-fidelity simulator in 15/17 studies.

          Conclusions

          Procedure skill after training with low fidelity simulators was not inferior to skill after training with high fidelity simulators in 15/17 studies. Some data suggest that the effectiveness of different fidelity simulators depends on the level of training of participants and requires further study.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills.

          There is a pressing need for an intraoperative assessment tool that meets high standards of reliability and validity to use as an outcome measure for different training strategies. The aim of this study was to develop a tool specific for laparoscopic skills and to evaluate its reliability and validity. The Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) consists of a 5-item global rating scale. A 10-item checklist and 2 visual analogue scales (VAS) for competence and case difficulty were also used. During laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 21 participants were evaluated by the attending surgeon, by 2 trained observers and by self-assessment while dissecting the gallbladder from the liver bed. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the total GOALS score was .89 (95% confidence interval [CI] .74 to .95) between observers, .82 (95% CI .67 to .92) between observers and attending surgeons, and .70 (95% CI .37 to .87) between participants and attending surgeons. The ICCs (observers) for the VAS (competence) and the checklist were .69 and .70, respectively. The mean total GOALS score (observers) for novices (postgraduate years [PGYs] 1 through 3) was 13 (95% CI 10.3 to 15.7) compared with 19.4 (95% CI 17.2 to 21.5) for experienced (PGY 4 through attending surgeons, P = .0006). The VAS demonstrated a difference in scores between novice and experienced participants (P = .001); however, the task checklist did not (P = .09). These data indicate that GOALS is feasible, reliable, and valid. They also suggest that it is superior to the task checklist and VAS for evaluation of technical skill by experienced raters. The findings support the use of GOALS in the training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Proficiency-based virtual reality training significantly reduces the error rate for residents during their first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies.

            Virtual reality (VR) training has been shown previously to improve intraoperative performance during part of a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of proficiency-based VR training on the outcome of the first 10 entire cholecystectomies performed by novices. Thirteen laparoscopically inexperienced residents were randomized to either (1) VR training until a predefined expert level of performance was reached, or (2) the control group. Videotapes of each resident's first 10 procedures were reviewed independently in a blinded fashion and scored for predefined errors. The VR-trained group consistently made significantly fewer errors (P = .0037). On the other hand, residents in the control group made, on average, 3 times as many errors and used 58% longer surgical time. The results of this study show that training on the VR simulator to a level of proficiency significantly improves intraoperative performance during a resident's first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning.

              High-fidelity simulators have enjoyed increasing popularity despite costs that may approach six figures. This is justified on the basis that simulators have been shown to result in large learning gains that may transfer to actual patient care situations. However, most commonly, learning from a simulator is compared with learning in a 'no-intervention' control group. This fails to clarify the relationship between simulator fidelity and learning, and whether comparable gains might be achieved at substantially lower cost. This analysis was conducted to review studies that compare learning from high-fidelity simulation (HFS) with learning from low-fidelity simulation (LFS) based on measures of clinical performance. Using a variety of search strategies, a total of 24 studies contrasting HFS and LFS and including some measure of performance were located. These studies referred to learning in three areas: auscultation skills; surgical techniques, and complex management skills such as cardiac resuscitation. Both HFS and LFS learning resulted in consistent improvements in performance in comparisons with no-intervention control groups. However, nearly all the studies showed no significant advantage of HFS over LFS, with average differences ranging from 1% to 2%. The factors influencing learning, and the reasons for this surprising finding, are discussed. © Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Med Educ
                Int J Med Educ
                IJME
                International Journal of Medical Education
                IJME
                2042-6372
                18 May 2020
                2020
                : 11
                : 97-106
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Bioengineering, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
                [2 ]Jichi Medical Simulation Center, Jichi Medical University, Tochigi, Japan
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Alan Kawarai Lefor, Department of Bioengineering, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. Email: alefor@ 123456jichi.ac.jp
                Article
                11-97106
                10.5116/ijme.5ea6.ae73
                7246118
                32425176
                f89e2760-a66c-443f-b78e-f199d9d356b5
                Copyright: © 2020 Alan Kawarai Lefor et al.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use of work provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

                History
                : 27 April 2020
                : 07 December 2019
                Categories
                Review Literature
                Simulator

                simulation education,low-fidelity,high-fidelity,laparoscopic surgery,skill assessment

                Comments

                Comment on this article