跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT02799563
NCT02799563已完成不适用

Integration of a Computer-Based Simulation of DKA Management Into Medical Education: A 2 by 2 Factorial Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Unity Health Toronto0 个研究点目标入组 124 人开始时间: 2014年7月最近更新:
适应症

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
入组人数
124
主要终点
Test 1 scores

研究概览

简要总结

A 2-by-2 factorial cluster randomized controlled trial was performed to: 1) Compare the effects of supervised (coached) versus unsupervised (no coach) administration of the DKA simulator on trainees' knowledge of DKA management immediately after (primary outcome) using the simulation and 3 and 6 months post-intervention (secondary outcome); 2) Determine whether a preselected number of DKA simulator practice cases or a self-selected number (self-regulated learning) of DKA simulator practice cases will result in superior trainee knowledge with respect to DKA management immediately after (primary outcome) and 3 and 6 months post-intervention (secondary outcome).

详细描述

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) accounts for approximately 115,000 hospital discharges per year in the United States. Appropriate management of this life-threatening clinical presentation requires timely and meticulous intervention, including avoidance of hypokalemia, hypoglycemia and DKA recurrence. However, clinical management continues to be less than ideal; for example, in a recent retrospective chart audit of patients admitted to a large teaching hospital with the primary diagnosis of DKA, 75% of them were placed on an inappropriate insulin regimen. This evidence to practice gap may be bridged with the use of computer simulation training.

In a simulated training environment, the trainee has the opportunity to manage uncommon but important clinical presentations that they may otherwise not experience in their training, without the risk of patient harm. A recent systematic review by Cook et al. analyzed 405 studies that compared a simulation-based intervention to no intervention for health care professionals from various disciplines. The authors found that simulation improved knowledge [pooled effect sizes of 1.20 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-1.35)] and skills [pooled effect sizes of 1.09 (95% CI,1.03-1.16)]. Another systematic review analyzed 50 studies that compared virtual patient simulation with no intervention and found large positive effects of virtual patient simulation compared to no intervention (pooled effect sizes 0.94 (95% CI 0.69-1.19) for knowledge outcomes, 0.80 (95% CI 0.52-1.08) for clinical reasoning and 0.90 (95% CI 0.61-1.19) for other skills).

Although there are many studies comparing simulation to no intervention, very few studies have directly compared different simulation-based interventions. Two systematic reviews of the effectiveness of simulation have demonstrated that repetitive practice is superior to a single-use instructional modality. Few studies included in these reviews reported how much practice is necessary to obtain long-term skill retention. These systematic reviews also demonstrated that training adapted to individualized performance is associated with better learning outcomes.

What remains unclear, however, is who should have the locus of control when defining the parameters of individualized learning. One randomized controlled trial compared self-regulated learning and instructor-regulated learning interventions for resident training using lumbar puncture simulation and revealed that self-regulated learning can lead to superior long-term skill retention at 3 months. As focused repetitive practice is one of the key elements of deliberate practice, one would postulate that self-regulated learners have a higher chance of achieving superior results given that they can optimize their amount of practice; however, this has yet to be assessed for the simulator learning environment.

The effectiveness of unsupervised versus supervised simulation curricula has yielded conflicting results. A systematic review comparing different simulation modalities revealed that group instruction was not associated with better outcomes (pooled effect size -0.22), whereas a previous systematic review of randomized trials comparing simulation to other educational modalities revealed that group instruction was associated with a positive learning effect (pooled effect size 0.72). One could assume that supervised learning is superior to unsupervised learning, as the former provides learners with the opportunity for continuous informative feedback, a key element of deliberate practice, in order to enhance their continued practice. However, this has not been formally tested for simulation-based education.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Factorial
盲法
None

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • First-year internal Medicine trainees (PGY-1) in their first 6 months of training and third-year medical students (CC3) were recruited to participate in this study. Inclusion criteria were: either a CC3 or PGY-1 rotating through their General Internal Medicine (GIM) rotation at one of the 7 teaching sites in Toronto.

排除标准

  • Excluded were those participants who participated in the DKA study during a previous block and participants who were not rotating through a GIM rotation.

结局指标

主要结局

Test 1 scores

时间窗: Immediately after intervention

Difference in simulator scores between the 4 cohorts immediately post- intervention (Test 1)

次要结局

  • Test 2 and Test 3 scores(3 and 6 months after intervention)
  • Self-reported comfort with DKA management (5-point Likert scale)(Before, immediately after, 3 months after intervention)
  • Number of simulations conducted(From intervention to 6 months after intervention)
  • Scores on Standardized exams(End of rotation (up to 10 months after intervention))
  • Correlation between simulator score and standardized exam score(Immediately after intervention, end of rotation (up to 10 months after intervention))

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Sponsor

相似试验

A Computer-Based Simulation of DKA Management | 临床试验