Teaching Medical Students How to Suture: Standard Simulation vs in Situ

NCT ID: NCT03499002

Last Updated: 2019-03-13

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: WITHDRAWN
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2018-04-30
• Study Completion Date: 2018-06-30

Brief Summary

The purpose of this project is to compare in situ simulation with standard lab simulation. To do this, 30 pre-clinical medical students will be randomized into the lab or ER and taught how to suture a simple laceration. To do this, a synthesized 'skin' will be placed over a volunteer's arm and will have an incision of a predetermined length.

Detailed Description

For this study, 30 first and second year students will be equally randomized to either a standard simulation lab or the ER department to learn the skill of suturing. These students will not have any knowledge of suturing prior to this study. Each group will have 15 students. Each student will be given access to the same suturing learning video. They will each attempt 15 sutures on a lab generated skin placed over a volunteer's arm. Each incision length will be predetermined and of the same length. The student will have the opportunity to re-watch the video in between each suture attempt. The volunteer will record the student's number of attempts and whether or not they had to review the video. The idea behind this, is that students should began to plateau with their learning after about 8-9 attempts and most will no longer require the video beyond that.After the 15 attempts, the student will immediately practice 6 sutures on a second skin over the volunteer's arm, again of a predetermined incision length. At this point the students will only be allowed to practice the suturing skill and will not have access to the learning video. At this point, the student's hands will be video recorded to assess the accuracy of the skill.One week after the learning session, regardless of the environment they initially learned in, the student will be brought to the ER and again allowed to practice 6 sutures on a simulated skin placed over a volunteer's arm. The incision will be the same length as the incision in the previous practice session. Again, the student's hands will be video recorded while practicing the 6 sutures.Afterward, the student will be given a questionnaire regarding which environment they practiced in and how prepared they felt to practice in the insitu environment without learning aids.

Conditions

Sutured Laceration; Laceration

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: OTHER
• Blinding Strategy: SINGLE

Study Groups

Simulation Lab

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Simulated Learning Environment

Intervention Type: OTHER

Intervention is the environment in which the medical student will learn to practice how to suture. The end goal is to determine the impact each environment has on their ability to learn the skill.

ER in situ Simulation

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Simulated Learning Environment

Intervention Type: OTHER

Intervention is the environment in which the medical student will learn to practice how to suture. The end goal is to determine the impact each environment has on their ability to learn the skill.

Interventions

Simulated Learning Environment

Intervention is the environment in which the medical student will learn to practice how to suture. The end goal is to determine the impact each environment has on their ability to learn the skill.

Intervention Type: OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Simulation lab; ER in situ simulation

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Pre clinical medical students (year one or two)

Exclusion Criteria

• Medical students not in first or second year training
• Extensive knowledge or background with suturing

• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

Memorial University of Newfoundland

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Chrystal Horwood, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador

References

Roussin CJ, Weinstock P. SimZones: An Organizational Innovation for Simulation Programs and Centers. Acad Med. 2017 Aug;92(8):1114-1120. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001746.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 28562455 (View on PubMed)

Jagneaux T, Caffery TS, Musso MW, Long AC, Zatarain L, Stopa E, Freeman N, Quin CC, Jones GN. Simulation-Based Education Enhances Patient Safety Behaviors During Central Venous Catheter Placement. J Patient Saf. 2021 Sep 1;17(6):425-429. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000425.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 28984729 (View on PubMed)

Sorensen JL, Ostergaard D, LeBlanc V, Ottesen B, Konge L, Dieckmann P, Van der Vleuten C. Design of simulation-based medical education and advantages and disadvantages of in situ simulation versus off-site simulation. BMC Med Educ. 2017 Jan 21;17(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0838-3.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 28109296 (View on PubMed)

Ullman E, Kennedy M, Di Delupis FD, Pisanelli P, Burbui AG, Cussen M, Galli L, Pini R, Gensini GF. The Tuscan Mobile Simulation Program: a description of a program for the delivery of in situ simulation training. Intern Emerg Med. 2016 Sep;11(6):837-41. doi: 10.1007/s11739-016-1401-2. Epub 2016 Feb 9.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 26861702 (View on PubMed)

Haji FA, Rojas D, Childs R, de Ribaupierre S, Dubrowski A. Measuring cognitive load: performance, mental effort and simulation task complexity. Med Educ. 2015 Aug;49(8):815-27. doi: 10.1111/medu.12773.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 26152493 (View on PubMed)

Rosen MA, Hunt EA, Pronovost PJ, Federowicz MA, Weaver SJ. In situ simulation in continuing education for the health care professions: a systematic review. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2012 Fall;32(4):243-54. doi: 10.1002/chp.21152.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 23280527 (View on PubMed)

Petrosoniak A, Auerbach M, Wong AH, Hicks CM. In situ simulation in emergency medicine: Moving beyond the simulation lab. Emerg Med Australas. 2017 Feb;29(1):83-88. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12705. Epub 2016 Oct 17.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 27748042 (View on PubMed)

Naismith LM, Cheung JJ, Ringsted C, Cavalcanti RB. Limitations of subjective cognitive load measures in simulation-based procedural training. Med Educ. 2015 Aug;49(8):805-14. doi: 10.1111/medu.12732.

Reference Type: RESULT

PMID: 26152492 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

MUNChrystal

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id