Clede-Belforti L, Nazar-Jara C, Montaña-Rodríguez R, Corvetto-Aqueveque M

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 219-224
PDF size: 193.89 Kb.

ABSTRACT

In recent years there has been a paradigm shift in the teaching of Medicine and its specialties, requiring the introduction of new teaching techniques such as simulation, which can imitate as close as possible the reality of a clinical situation or procedure, using mannequins models, actors or virtual patients which replace real patients, for the purpose of personal training, teamwork evaluate, test new instruments, and evaluate skills and knowledge in a safe environment conducive to learning, then receive feedback and advice on the rights and wrongs committed during the clinical or simulated procedure. The simulation acts as a bridge between theory and clinical practice, taking advantages and limitations to achieve this goal. Its usefulness in anesthesiology is to practice and develop skills in standard procedures, crisis management, teamwork and leadership, and exposure to rare events such as malignant hyperthermia. There are different types of simulation as part task trainers, simulated patients, multimedia programs, virtual reality and high-fidelity mannequins. One session of high-fidelity simulation has three parts: prebriefing, scenario simulation and debriefing. The debriefing is the facilitated discussion of the simulated scenario, being the key element of simulation based learning, as opposed to learning in clinical settings.

REFERENCES

1. Young JS, Dubose JE, Hedrick TL, et al. The use of ‘‘war games’’ to evaluate performance of students and residents in basic clinical scenarios: a disturbing analysis. J Trauma. 2007;63:556-564.

2. Eppich WJ, Adler MD, McGaghie WC. Emergency and critical care pediatrics: use of medical simulation for training in acute pediatric emergencies. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2006;18:266-271.

3. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, et al. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27:10-28.

4. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, et al. Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology. 2006;105:279-285.

5. Wayne DB, Siddall VJ, Butter J, et al. A longitudinal study of internal medicine residents’ retention of advanced cardiac life support skills. Acad Med. 2006;81:S9-S12.

6. Ottestad E, Boulet JR, Lighthall GK. Evaluating the management of septic shock using patient simulation. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:769-775.

7. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME General Competencies, version 1.3. Available: www.acgme.org/outcome/comp/comp.

8. Okuda Y, Bryson EO, De Maria S Jr, et al. The utility of simulation in medical education: what is the evidence? Mount Sinai J of Med. 2009;76:330-43.

9. Kolb DA, Fry R. Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In: Cooper C (ed.). Theories of Group Process. London: John Wiley; 1975.

10. Bryan RL, Kreuter MW, Brownson RC. Integrating adult learning principles into training for public health practice. Health Promot Pract. 2009;10:557-63.

11. Gaba DM. Improving anesthesiologists performance by simulating reality. Anesthesiology. 1992;76:491-494.

12. Frederick HJ, Corvetto MA, Hobbs GW, et al. The Simulation Roulette Game. Simul Health. 2011;6:244-49.

13. Clede L, Nazar C, Montaña R. Simulación en Educación Médica y Anestesia. Revista Chilena de Anestesia. 2012;41:46-52.

14. Graber MA, Wyatt C, Kasparek L, et al. Does Simulator training for medical students change patient opinions and attitudes toward medical student procedures in the emergency department? Acad Emerg Med. 2005;12:635-639.

15. Levine AI, Swartz MH. Standardized patients: the “other” simulation. J Crit Care. 2008;23:179-84.

16. Maran NJ, Glavin RJ. Low to high-fidelity simulation. A continuum of medical education? Med Educ. 2003;37:22-28.

17. Lane J, Slavin S, Ziv A. Simulation in medical education: a review. Simulation & Gaming. 2001;32:297-314.

18. Knowles M. The modern practice of adult education: from pedagogy to andragogy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1980. pp. 44-45.

19. Ostergaard D, Dieckmann P, Lippert A. Simulation and CRM. Best Practice Research Clinic Anesthesiology. 2011;25:239-49.

20. Kolb DA. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1984.

21. Gibbs G. Learning by doing: a guide to teaching and learning methods. London: Fell; 1988.

22. Thatcher DC, Robinson MJ. An introduction to games and simulations in education. Hants: Solent Simulations; 1985.

23. Lederman LC. Differences that make a difference: intercultural communication, simulation, and the debriefing process in diverse interaction. In: Annual Conference of the International Simulation and Gaming Association. Kyoto, Japan; 1991.

24. Petranek C. Maturation in experiential learning: Principles of simulation and gaming. Simul Gaming. 1994;513-522.

25. Rall M, Manser T, Howard S. Key elements of debriefing for simulator training. Eur J Anaesth. 2000;17:516-517.

26. Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, et al. Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Academic Medicine. 2003;78:783-788.

27. Wilhelm J. Crew member and instructor revaluations of line orientated flight training. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology. 1991. pp. 362-367.