We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Simulation Versus Problem Based Learning for Cerebrospinal Drainage Catheter Insertion and Management: A Randomized Trial in a Large Academic Anesthesiology Residency Program.
OBJECTIVE: Cerebrospinal fluid drainage catheter-related complications can be reduced by following strict guidelines during their introduction, maintenance, and removal. The authors therefore aimed to determine whether simulation-based learning would improve senior anesthesiology residents' patient care performance during the insertion and management of these catheters compared to interactive problem-based learning (PBL) using the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills global rating scale (ANTS).
DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial.
SETTING: Vascular or hybrid operating rooms in a large academic tertiary care center.
PARTICIPANTS: Senior anesthesia (categorical anesthesia-3) residents rotating through the vascular rotation at the Cleveland Clinic main campus in the period between December 2014 and June 2017.
INTERVENTION: Simulation-based learning versus PBL.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the composite score (ANTS global rating scale) achieved by participating residents as evaluated by their supervising anesthesiologists. Out of 28 residents who completed the study, N = 13 were randomized to simulation-based learning and N = 15 residents to the PBL approach. The median (first quartile, third quartile) composite score was 16 (14, 16) and 16 (13, 16) for the simulation-based learning and PBL groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in staff evaluation of the 2 study groups (p = 0.48) with an estimated odds (95% confidence interval) of getting a better staff evaluation score of 1.9 (0.3-10.6) times higher comparing simulation versus traditional training groups.
CONCLUSION: Compared to interactive PBL, simulation-based learning does not result in a statistically significant improvement in anesthesia resident performance during insertion and management of cerebrospinal fluid drainage catheters.
DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial.
SETTING: Vascular or hybrid operating rooms in a large academic tertiary care center.
PARTICIPANTS: Senior anesthesia (categorical anesthesia-3) residents rotating through the vascular rotation at the Cleveland Clinic main campus in the period between December 2014 and June 2017.
INTERVENTION: Simulation-based learning versus PBL.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the composite score (ANTS global rating scale) achieved by participating residents as evaluated by their supervising anesthesiologists. Out of 28 residents who completed the study, N = 13 were randomized to simulation-based learning and N = 15 residents to the PBL approach. The median (first quartile, third quartile) composite score was 16 (14, 16) and 16 (13, 16) for the simulation-based learning and PBL groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in staff evaluation of the 2 study groups (p = 0.48) with an estimated odds (95% confidence interval) of getting a better staff evaluation score of 1.9 (0.3-10.6) times higher comparing simulation versus traditional training groups.
CONCLUSION: Compared to interactive PBL, simulation-based learning does not result in a statistically significant improvement in anesthesia resident performance during insertion and management of cerebrospinal fluid drainage catheters.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app