The additional ımpact of simulation based medical training to traditional medical training alone in advanced cardiac life support: a scenario based evaluation

Objectives. The principal aim of medical education is to provide medical student with the fundamental knowledge and re-quired skills that can be specifically used in real-life conditions such as high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Traditional medical training (TMT) is an effective method in Advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) training. Simulation-based medical training (SBMT), with the advancements in technology, is a relatively new, but a preferred ACLS training method since it implements a safe educational en-vironment. We planned a scenario-based study to evaluate the additional impact of SBMT to TMT alone in ACLS training. Methods. This before-after type, com-parative, cohort study was performed in a simulation center. One hundred thirty-six 6th grade medical students who took ACLS training with TMT on their emer-gency medicine clerkship were enrolled in 34 teams. All students managed a specific ACLS scenario before and after SBMT with a high-fidelity manikin. All data regarding chest compression, airway management, defibrillation and drug administration were recorded by the sensors of the high-fidelity manikin.

Results. Median age was 23 and 51.5% were male. After SBMT, we found significant increases in the successful CPR cycle rate and successful scenario completion rate (60.3%; 61.8%, respectively). Median time to chest compression (Tcc) and defibrillation (Tdef) were significantly decreased after SBMT (1 sec., 1 sec., respectively). For the adequacy of chest compressions, compression depth, recoil, and frequency are all significantly increased after SBMT, 7.0 mm, 6.0 mm and 8.5/min, respectively. Conclusion. SBMT in combination with TMT is a promising ACLS training meth-od when compared to TMT alone.

simulation-based medical train-ing, traditional medical training, high-fidel-ity manikin, CPR, ACLS

1. Lunenfeld E, Weinreb B, Lavi Y, Amiel GE, Friedman M. Assessment of emergency medicine: a comparison of an experimental objective structured clinical examination with a practical examination. Med Educ 1991;25(1):38-44.

2. Brennan EE, McGraw RC, Brooks SC. Accuracy of instructor assessment of chest compression quality during simulated resuscita-tion. CJEM 2016;18(4):276-82.

3. Amacher SA, Schumacher C, Legeret C, Tschan F, Semmer NK, Marsch S, et al. Influence of gender on the performance of cardio-pulmonary rescue teams: a randomized, prospective simulator study. Crit Care Med2017;45(7):1184-91.

4. Kim JH, Kim WO, Min KT, Yang JY, Nam YT. Learning by computer simulation does not lead to better test performance than textbook study in the diagnosis and treatment of dysrhythmias. J Clin Anesth 2002;14(5):395-400.

5. Perkins GD. Simulation in resuscitation training. Resuscitation 2007;73(2):202-11.

6. Eng AJ, Namba JM, Box KW, Lane JR, Kim DY, Davis DP, et al. High-fidelity simulation training in advanced resuscitation for pharmacy residents. Am J Pharm Educ 2014;78(3):59.

7. DeVita MA, Schaefer J, Lutz J, Wang H, Dongilli T. Improving medical emergency team (MET) performance using a novel cur-riculum and a computerized human patient simulator. Qual Saf Health Care 2005;14(5):326-31.

8. Breuer G, Knipfer C, Huber T, Huettl S, Shams N, Knipfer K, et al. Competency in managing cardiac arrest: A scenario-based evaluation of dental students. Acta Odontol Scand 2016;74(4):241-9.

9. Wayne DB, Didwania A, Feinglass J, Fudala MJ, Barsuk JH, McGaghie WC. Simulation-based education improves quality of care during cardiac arrest team responses at an academic teaching hospital: a case-control study. Chest 2008;133(1):56-61.

10. Ruesseler M, Weinlich M, Muller MP, Byhahn C, Marzi I, Walcher F. Simulation training improves ability to manage medical emer-gencies. Emerg Med J 2010;27(10):734-8.

11. Yoo HB, Park JH, Ko JK. An effective method of teaching advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) skills in simulation-based training. Korean J Med Educ 2012;24(1):7-14.

12. Yang TM, Kao Y, Wang CT, Chung MH, Lin HJ, Lin SJ, et al. ACLS training: comparison of physicians and nurses with teamwork-based high-fidelity simulation. Am J Emerg Med 2014;32(9):1132-4.

13. Adams AJ, Wasson EA, Admire JR, Pablo Gomez P, Babayeuski RA, Sako EY, et al. A comparison of teaching modalities and fidelity of simulation levels in teaching resuscitation scenarios. J Surg Educ 2015;72(5):778-85.

14. Wayne DB, Butter J, Siddall VJ, Fudala MJ, Linquist LA, Feinglass J, et al. Simulation-based training of internal medicine residents in advanced cardiac life support protocols: a randomized trial. Teach Learn Med 2005;17(3):210-6.

15. Wayne DB, Butter J, Siddall VJ, Fudala MJ, Wade LD, Feinglass J, et al. Mastery learning of advanced cardiac life support skills by internal medicine residents using simulation technology and deliberate practice. J Gen Intern Med 2006;21(3):251-6.

16. Nolan JP, Perkins GD, Soar J. Chest compression rate: where is the sweet spot? Circulation 2012;125(24):2968-70.

17. Idris AH, Guffey D, Aufderheide TP, Brown S, Morrison LJ, Nichols P, et al. Relationship between chest compression rates and outcomes from cardiac arrest. Circulation 2012;125(24):3004-12.

18. Ko PY, Scott JM, Mihai A, Grant WD. Comparison of a modified longitudinal simulation-based advanced cardiovascular life support to a traditional advanced cardiovascular life support curriculum in third-year medical students. Teach Learn Med 2011;23(4):324-30.