medigraphic.com
ISSN 2683-2348 (Digital)
Federación Latinoamericana de Simulación Clínica y Seguridad del Paciente

2020, Número 1

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Simulación Clínica 2020; 2 (1)


Recomendaciones generales para elaborar un programa de entrenamiento basado en simulación para desarrollar competencias en pregrado y postgrado

Vela J, Contreras C, Jarry C, Varas J, Corvetto M

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 67
Paginas: 26-38
Archivo PDF: 587.84 Kb.


RESUMEN

La simulación se define como una técnica que recrea elementos de eventos reales de forma controlada con un propósito educacional, evaluativo o de investigación. Su uso es cada vez más frecuente en el Área de Ciencias de la Salud, y se utiliza en los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje o en la evaluación o acreditación de los profesionales. Sin embargo, existe una gran heterogeneidad respecto al diseño y reporte de los resultados de diversos programas de simulación, lo que dificulta la comparación y recolección de evidencia científica. El presente artículo de reflexión busca revisar los principales aspectos que se deben considerar a la hora de desarrollar un programa de simulación con la esperanza de ayudar a mejorar la calidad de la evidencia y de la educación mediante la simulación clínica.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Lopreiato JO, Downing D, Gammon W, Lioce L, Sittner B, Slot V, et al. Healthcare simulation dictionary. Healthcare. 2a. Ed. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2020.

  2. Bradley P. The history of simulation in medical education and possible future directions. Med Educ. 2006; 40 (3): 254-262. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02394.x.

  3. Shy KS, Hageman JJ, Le J. The Role of Aircraft Simulation in Improving Flight Safety Through Control Training. California: Dryden Flight Research Center; 2012.

  4. Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird N, Lawthers AG, Localio AR, Barnes BA, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients. N Engl J Med. 1991; 324 (6): 377-384. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199102073240605.

  5. Hutter MM, Kellogg KC, Ferguson CM, Abbott WM, Warshaw AL. The impact of the 80-hour resident workweek on surgical residents and attending surgeons. Ann Surg. 2006; 243 (6): 864-871. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000220042.48310.66.

  6. Corvetto M, Bravo MP, Montaña R, Utili F, Escudero E, Boza C, et al. Simulación en educación médica: una sinopsis. Rev Med Chil. 2013; 141 (1): 70-79. doi: 10.4067/S0034-98872013000100010.

  7. Varas J, Mejía R, Riquelme A, Maluenda F, Buckel E, Salinas J, et al. Significant transfer of surgical skills obtained with an advanced laparoscopic training program to a laparoscopic jejunojejunostomy in a live porcine model: Feasibility of learning advanced laparoscopy in a general surgery residency. Surg Endosc. 2012; 26 (12): 3486-3494. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2391-4.

  8. Varas J, Achurra P, León F, Castillo R, De La Fuente N, Aggarwal R, et al. Assessment of central venous catheterization in a simulated model using a motion-tracking device: an experimental validation study. Ann Surg Innov Res. 2016; 10 (1): 2. doi: 10.1186/s13022-016-0025-6.

  9. McCaughey CS, Traynor MK. The role of simulation in nurse education. Nurse Educ Today. 2010; 30 (8): 827-832. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.03.005.

  10. Berragan L. Learning nursing through simulation: a case study approach towards an expansive model of learning. Nurse Educ Today. 2014; 34 (8): 1143-1148. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.03.005.

  11. Perry S, Bridges SM, Burrow MF. A review of the use of simulation in dental education. Simul Healthc. 2015; 10 (1): 31-37.

  12. Khan R, Plahouras J, Johnston BC, Scaffidi MA, Grover SC, Walsh CM. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 8: CD008237. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008237.pub3.

  13. Elliott S, Murrell K, Harper P, Stephens T, Pellowe C. A comprehensive systematic review of the use of simulation in the continuing education and training of qualified medical, nursing and midwifery staff. JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009; 9 (17): 538-587. Disponible en: http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27819938.

  14. Norman J. Systematic review of the literature on simulation in nursing education. ABNF J. 2012; 23 (2): 24-28. Disponible en: http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22774355.

  15. Bjerrum F, Thomsen ASS, Nayahangan LJ, Konge L. Surgical simulation: current practices and future perspectives for technical skills training. Med Teach. 2018; 40 (7): 668-675. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1472754.

  16. Barsuk JH, Cohen ER, Feinglass J, McGaghie WC, Wayne DB. Use of simulation-based education to reduce catheter-related bloodstream infections. Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169 (15): 1420-1423. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.215.

  17. Wehbi NK, Wani R, Yang Y, Wilson F, Medcalf S, Monaghan B, et al. A needs assessment for simulation-based training of emergency medical providers in Nebraska, USA. Adv Simul (Lond). 2018; 3 (1): 22. doi: 10.1186/s41077-018-0081-6.

  18. Humphrey-Murto S, Varpio L, Wood TJ, Gonsalves C, Ufholz LA, Mascioli K, et al. The use of the Delphi and other consensus group methods in medical education research: a review. Acad Med. 2017; 92 (10): 1491-1498. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001812.

  19. Glass CC, Acton RD, Blair PG, Campbell AR, Deutsch ES, Jones DB, et al. American College of Surgeons/Association for Surgical Education medical student simulation-based surgical skills curriculum needs assessment. Am J Surg. 2014; 207 (2): 165-169. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.07.032.

  20. Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med. 1990; 65 (9 Suppl): S63-7. Disponible en: http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2400509

  21. Downing SM. Validity: on meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ. 2003; 37 (9): 830-837. Disponible en: http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14506816.

  22. Cook DA, Beckman TJ. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. Am J Med. 2006; 119 (2): 166.e7-166.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.10.036.

  23. Hirsch E. The core knowledge curriculum-what’s behind its success? Educational Leadership. Educ Leadersh. 1993; 50 (8): 23-30. http: //www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may93/vol50/num08/The-Core-Knowledge-Curriculum-What’s-Behind-Its-Success¢.aspx.

  24. Ferrero F. ¿Puede la simulación clínica contribuir al aprendizaje significativo de competencias educativas? Una aproximación constructivista. Rev Fac Med UNAM. 2017; 60 (S1): 49-59. Disponible en: https: //www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/facmed/un-2017/uns171f.pdf.

  25. Hamstra SJ, Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Acad Med. 2014; 89 (3): 387-392. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000130.

  26. Allen J, Buffardi L, Hays R, Drillings M, Kaplan M. The relationship of simulator fidelity to task and performance variables. USA; United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences: 1991. Disponible en: https: //apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a238941.pdf.

  27. Matsumoto ED, Hamstra SJ, Radomski SB, Cusimano MD. The effect of bench model fidelity on endourological skills: a randomized controlled study. J Urol. 2002; 167 (3): 1243-1247. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347 (05)65274-3.

  28. Grober ED, Hamstra SJ, Wanzel KR, Reznick RK, Matsumoto ED, Sidhu RS, et al. The educational impact of bench model fidelity on the acquisition of technical skill: the use of clinically relevant outcome measures. Ann Surg. 2004; 240 (2): 374-381. doi: 10.1097/01.SLA.0000133346.07434.30.

  29. Zendejas B, Wang AT, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, Cook DA. Cost: the missing outcome in simulation-based medical education research: A systematic review. Surgery. 2013; 153 (2): 160-176. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2012.06.025.

  30. Isaranuwatchai W, Brydges R, Carnahan H, Backstein D, Dubrowski A. Comparing the cost-effectiveness of simulation modalities: a case study of peripheral intravenous catheterization training. Adv Heal Sci Educ. 2014; 19 (2): 219-232. doi: 10.1007/s10459-013-9464-6.

  31. Van Nortwick SS, Lendvay TS, Jensen AR, Wright AS, Horvath KD, Kim S. Methodologies for establishing validity in surgical simulation studies. Surgery. 2010; 147 (5): 622-630. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.068.

  32. Beckman TJ, Ghosh AK, Cook DA, Erwin PJ, Mandrekar JN. How reliable are assessments of clinical teaching? J Gen Intern Med. 2004; 19 (9): 971-977. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.40066.x.

  33. Messick S. Validity BT. Educational measurement. In: Linn RL. Educational measurement. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1989.

  34. Foster SL, Cone JD. Validity issues in clinical assessment. Psychol Assess. 1995; 7 (3): 248-260. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.248.

  35. Cook DA, Hatala R. Validation of educational assessments: a primer for simulation and beyond. Adv Simul. 2016; 1 (1): 31. doi: 10.1186/s41077-016-0033-y.

  36. Cook DA, Brydges R, Ginsburg S, Hatala R. A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane’s framework. Med Educ. 2015; 49 (6): 560-575. doi: 10.1111/medu.12678.

  37. Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Satava RM. Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training. Surg Endosc. 2003; 17 (10): 1525-1529. doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-0035-4.

  38. Cook DA. Much ado about differences: why expert-novice comparisons add little to the validity argument. Adv Heal Sci Educ. 2015; 20 (3): 829-834. doi: 10.1007/s10459-014-9551-3.

  39. Eignor DR. The standards for educational and psychological testing. In: Geisinger KF, Bracken BA, Carlson JF, Hansen JI, Kuncel NR, Reise SP. APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology, Test Theory and Testing and Assessment in Industrial and Organizational Psychology. American Psychological Association; 2013. pp 245-250. doi: 10.1037/14047-013.

  40. Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychol Assess. 1995; 7 (3): 309-319. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309.

  41. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull. 1959 [Accessed 29 June 2019]; 56 (2): 81-105. http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13634291.

  42. Hatala R, Cook DA, Brydges R, Hawkins R. Constructing a validity argument for the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS): a systematic review of validity evidence. Adv Heal Sci Educ. 2015; 20 (5): 1149-1175. doi: 10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1.

  43. Grantcharov TP, Rosenberg J, Pahle E, Fench-Jensen P. Virtual reality computer simulation. Surg Endosc. 2001; 15 (3): 242-244. doi: 10.1007/s004640090008.

  44. Boza C, León F, Buckel E, Riquelme A, Crovari F, Martínez J, et al. Simulation-trained junior residents perform better than general surgeons on advanced laparoscopic cases. Surg Endosc. 2017; 31 (1): 135-141. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4942-6.

  45. Downing SM, Haladyna TM. Validity threats: overcoming interference with proposed interpretations of assessment data. Med Educ. 2004 [Accessed 29 June 2019]; 38 (3): 327-333. Disponible en: http: //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14996342.

  46. Traub RE, Rowley GL. An NCME Instructional module on. Understanding reliability. Educ Meas Issues Pract. 1991; 10 (1): 37-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1991.tb00183.x.

  47. Downing SM. Reliability: on the reproducibility of assessment data. Med Educ. 2004; 38 (9): 1006-1012. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01932.x.

  48. Cook DA, Kuper A, Hatala R, Ginsburg S. When assessment data are words. Acad Med. 2016; 91 (10): 1359-1369. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001175.

  49. Szasz P, Louridas M, Harris KA, Aggarwal R, Grantcharov TP. Assessing technical competence in surgical trainees. Ann Surg. 2015; 261 (6): 1046-1055. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000866.

  50. Ilgen JS, Ma IWY, Hatala R, Cook DA. A systematic review of validity evidence for checklists versus global rating scales in simulation-based assessment. Med Educ. 2015; 49 (2): 161-173. doi: 10.1111/medu.12621.

  51. Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review. JAMA. 2009; 302 (12): 1316-1326. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1365.

  52. Aggarwal R, Dosis A, Bello F, Darzi A. Motion tracking systems for assessment of surgical skill. Surg Endosc. 2007; 21 (2): 339-339. doi: 10.1007/s00464-005-0561-3.

  53. Rutherford DN, D’Angelo A-LD, Law KE, Pugh CM. Advanced engineering technology for measuring performance. Surg Clin North Am. 2015; 95 (4): 813-826. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2015.04.005,

  54. Jarry C, Inzunza M, Quezada J, Marino C, Zamorano E, Alvarado V, et al. Gimnasio de simulación quirúrgica: una herramienta educacional factible de entrenamiento continuo. Experiencia de un centro universitario. Rev Latinoam Simulación Clínica. 2019; 1 (1): 18-24. Disponible en: https: //www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/simulacion/rsc-2019/rsc191d.pdf.

  55. Castillo R, Buckel E, León F, Varas J, Alvarado J, Achurra P, et al. Effectiveness of learning advanced laparoscopic skills in a brief intensive laparoscopy training program. J Surg Educ. 2015; 72 (4): 648-653. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.01.016.

  56. Quezada J, Achurra P, Jarry C, Asbun D, Tejos R, Inzunza M, et al. Minimally invasive tele-mentoring opportunity-the mito project. Surg Endosc. 2019. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-07024-1.

  57. Pugh C, Plachta S, Auyang E, Pryor A, Hungness E. Outcome measures for surgical simulators: is the focus on technical skills the best approach? Surgery. 2010; 147 (5): 646-654. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.01.011.

  58. Dawe SR, Pena GN, Windsor JA, Broeders JA, Cregan PC, Hewett PJ, et al. Systematic review of skills transfer after surgical simulation-based training. Br J Surg. 2014; 101 (9): 1063-1076. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9482.

  59. Reznick RK, MacRae H. Teaching surgical skills-changes in the wind. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355 (25): 2664-2669. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra054785.

  60. Scott DJ, Dunnington GL. The New ACS/APDS Skills curriculum: moving the learning curve out of the operating room. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008; 12 (2): 213-221. doi: 10.1007/s11605-007-0357-y

  61. Dawoud D, Lyndon W, Mrug S, Bissler JJ, Mrug M. Impact of ultrasound-guided kidney biopsy simulation on trainee confidence and biopsy outcomes. Am J Nephrol. 2012; 36 (6): 570-574. doi: 10.1159/000345305.

  62. Valen K, Holm AL, Jensen KT, Grov EK. Nursing students’ perception on transferring experiences in palliative care simulation to practice. Nurse Educ Today. 2019; 77: 53-58. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2019.03.007.

  63. Morrison JE, Hammon C. On measuring the effectiveness of large-scale training simulations. Alexandria Virginia: IDA; 2000 [Accessed 8 September 2019]; https: //apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA394491.

  64. Orzech N, Palter VN, Reznick RK, Aggarwal R, Grantcharov TP. A comparison of 2 ex vivo training curricula for advanced laparoscopic skills. Ann Surg. 2012; 255 (5): 833-839. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824aca09.

  65. Andreatta P, Saxton E, Thompson M, Annich G. Simulation-based mock codes significantly correlate with improved pediatric patient cardiopulmonary arrest survival rates. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011; 12 (1): 33-38. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e3181e89270.

  66. Asche CV, Kim M, Brown A, Golden A, Laack TA, Rosario J, et al. Communicating value in simulation: cost benefit analysis and return on investment. Acad Emerg Med. 2018; 25 (2): 230-237. doi: 10.1111/acem.13336.

  67. Cohen ER, Feinglass J, Barsuk JH, Barnard C, O’Donnell A, McGaghie WC, et al. Cost savings from reduced catheter-related bloodstream infection after simulation-based education for residents in a medical intensive care unit. Simul Healthc J Soc Simul Healthc. 2010; 5 (2): 98-102. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3181bc8304.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com