Interprofessional Education of Medical Students Using Medical Simulation
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Active, not recruiting
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 62
- Locations
- 2
- Primary Endpoint
- Evaluation of the ongoing interprofessional education
Study Overview
Brief Summary
Due to the growing role of medical simulation in the education of medical students and the development of cooperation in interdisciplinary teams in the health care sector, a study was designed to examine the relationship between the competences and resources of students and the role of education through simulation classes based on the development of technical and in cooperation with specialists in these fields. Researchers want to focus on students' levels of stress and anxiety, coping strategies, and self-efficacy. An important element will be the self-assessment of students on the level of their non-technical competences.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Non Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Other
- Masking
- None
Eligibility Criteria
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Voluntary consent to participate in the study
- •Declaration of participation in the Interdisciplinary Simulation Circle
- •Student status in the field of medicine (6th year) or nursing (3rd year of first-cycle studies) or medical rescue (3rd year)
Exclusion Criteria
- •Completed another course of medical studies
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Evaluation of the ongoing interprofessional education
Time Frame: 10 months
1. A self - report questionnaire including a socio-demographic data sheet and questions regarding the motivation for choosing the field of study, as well as a form for the ongoing evaluation of Interdisciplinary Club classes to be completed before and after classes.
Evaluation of the impact of interprofessional education using the simulation method on self-efficacy.
Time Frame: 10 months
1. General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) with the total score calculated by finding the sum of all the items and ranges between 10 and 40, with higher score indicating more self-efficacy.
Evaluation of the impact of interprofessional education using the simulation method on student stress level.
Time Frame: 10 month
A 10-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) for assessing how often a respondent thought and felt in the given way in the last month using a five-point Likert scale. The result of the measurement is the stress severity index. The PSS score is obtained by summing across all items. Higher scores indicate higher levels of perceived stress.
Evaluation of the impact of interprofessional education using the simulation method on stress coping.
Time Frame: 10 month
The Stress Coping Inventory (Mini COPE). The respondent determines how often he/she acts in the described way when experiencing a stressful situation using a four-point Likert scale (0-I almost never do that, 1-I rarely do that, 2-I often do that, 3-I almost always do that). Every statement is assigned to one of 14 stress-coping categories.
Evaluation of the impact of interprofessional education on soft-skill development
Time Frame: 10 months
1. Self-assessment form in the field of soft skills - own study, which contains 17 statements describing soft skills in an interprofessional team. Respondents assess their development on a five-point Likert scale, where "1" means "I completely disagree" and "5" - "I completely agree".
Evaluation of the impact of interprofessional education using the simulation method on perception of medical professions.
Time Frame: 10 month
Word Cloud - own study - a form used to assess the mutual perception of medical professions in an interprofessional team. The respondents choose five terms from the proposed word database.
Evaluation of the impact of interprofessional education using the simulation method on students anxiety.
Time Frame: 10 month
A 20-item State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) for assessing trait anxiety and 20 for state anxiety. All items are rated on a 4-point scale (e.g., from "Almost Never" to "Almost Always"). Higher scores indicate greater anxiety.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Barbara Siekierska
Principal Investigator
Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University