Get access

Training on a new, portable, simple simulator transfers to performance of complex bronchoscopy procedures

Authors


  • Authorship and contributorship

    Charlotte Loumann Krogh contributed to the design of the study, acquisition of data, and analysis and interpretation of data, and drafted the article. Lars Konge contributed to the design of the study, and analysis and interpretation of data, and critically revised the article. Johanna Bjurström contributed to acquisition of data and critically revised the article. Charlotte Ringsted contributed to the design of the study and critically revised the article. All authors have finally approved of the manuscript.

  • Ethics

    The study protocol was submitted to the local research ethics committee, which waived the need for full ethical approval (protocol-no.: H-1–2010-125). All participants were informed about the purpose of the study and gave written informed consent.

  • Conflicts of interest

    The authors have stated explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article.

Correspondence

Lars Konge, MD, PhD, Kongestien 72, 2830 Virum

Denmark

Tel: +45 35 45 54 28

Fax: +45 35 45 44 37

email: lkonge@yahoo.dk

Abstract

Introduction

Virtual-reality (VR) simulation provides a safe and effective learning environment prior to practicing on patients. However, existing bronchoscopy simulators are expensive and not easily portable.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of self-directed training on a new, portable, simple simulator measured by transfer of skills to performance of more complex bronchoscopy procedures on an advanced VR simulator.

Methods

Twenty medical students participated in the study. After a general introduction to bronchoscopy, they were randomised into two groups, receiving either self-directed bronchoscopy training using a portable, simple simulator or no manual training. Subsequently, all participants were tested on complex scenarios in an advanced VR simulator using a validated bronchoscopy quality test. Bronchoscopy quality scores were compared using independent samples t-test and correlated with a previously established pass-fail standard.

Results

The intervention group spent an average of 71-min training on the new simulator. The intervention group performed significantly better than the control group, mean bronchoscopy quality score 0.55 [standard deviation (SD) 0.16] vs 0.36 (SD 0.10), P = 0.005, effect size = 1.47. Eight out of 10 participants in the intervention group passed the test compared with only 1 out of 10 in the control group.

Conclusion

The effect of a brief, self-directed training session using a portable, simple simulator was substantial and transferred to performance of more complex skills.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary