Exploring the Study of Simulation as a Continuing Professional Development Strategy for Physicians.

IF 1.6 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Walter Tavares, Dominique Piquette, Dorothy Luong, Michelle Chiu, Christopher Dyte, Kristin Fraser, Marcia Clark
{"title":"Exploring the Study of Simulation as a Continuing Professional Development Strategy for Physicians.","authors":"Walter Tavares,&nbsp;Dominique Piquette,&nbsp;Dorothy Luong,&nbsp;Michelle Chiu,&nbsp;Christopher Dyte,&nbsp;Kristin Fraser,&nbsp;Marcia Clark","doi":"10.1097/CEH.0000000000000470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Practicing physicians have the responsibility to engage in lifelong learning. Although simulation is an effective experiential educational strategy, physicians seldom select it for continuing professional development (CPD) for reasons that are poorly understood. The objective of this study was to explore existing evidence on simulation-based CPD and the factors influencing physicians' engagement in simulation-based CPD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review of the literature on simulation-based CPD included MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases. Studies involving the use of simulation for practicing physicians' CPD were included. Information related to motivations for participating in simulation-based CPD, study objectives, research question(s), rationale(s), reasons for using simulation, and simulation features was abstracted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded 8609 articles, with 6906 articles undergoing title and abstract screening after duplicate removal. Six hundred sixty-one articles underwent full-text screening. Two hundred twenty-five studies (1993-2021) were reviewed for data abstraction. Only four studies explored physicians' motivations directly, while 31 studies described incentives or strategies used to enroll physicians in studies on simulation-based CPD. Most studies focused on leveraging or demonstrating the utility of simulation for CPD. Limited evidence suggests that psychological safety, direct relevance to clinical practice, and familiarity with simulation may promote future engagement.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although simulation is an effective experiential educational method, factors explaining its uptake by physicians as a CPD strategy are unclear. Additional evidence of simulation effectiveness may fail to convince physicians to participate in simulation-based CPD unless personal, social, educational, or contextual factors that shape physicians' motivations and choices to engage in simulation-based CPD are explored.</p>","PeriodicalId":50218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions","volume":"43 3","pages":"188-197"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000470","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Practicing physicians have the responsibility to engage in lifelong learning. Although simulation is an effective experiential educational strategy, physicians seldom select it for continuing professional development (CPD) for reasons that are poorly understood. The objective of this study was to explore existing evidence on simulation-based CPD and the factors influencing physicians' engagement in simulation-based CPD.

Methods: A scoping review of the literature on simulation-based CPD included MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases. Studies involving the use of simulation for practicing physicians' CPD were included. Information related to motivations for participating in simulation-based CPD, study objectives, research question(s), rationale(s), reasons for using simulation, and simulation features was abstracted.

Results: The search yielded 8609 articles, with 6906 articles undergoing title and abstract screening after duplicate removal. Six hundred sixty-one articles underwent full-text screening. Two hundred twenty-five studies (1993-2021) were reviewed for data abstraction. Only four studies explored physicians' motivations directly, while 31 studies described incentives or strategies used to enroll physicians in studies on simulation-based CPD. Most studies focused on leveraging or demonstrating the utility of simulation for CPD. Limited evidence suggests that psychological safety, direct relevance to clinical practice, and familiarity with simulation may promote future engagement.

Discussion: Although simulation is an effective experiential educational method, factors explaining its uptake by physicians as a CPD strategy are unclear. Additional evidence of simulation effectiveness may fail to convince physicians to participate in simulation-based CPD unless personal, social, educational, or contextual factors that shape physicians' motivations and choices to engage in simulation-based CPD are explored.

探索模拟作为医师持续专业发展策略的研究。
导言:执业医师有责任从事终身学习。虽然模拟是一种有效的体验式教育策略,但医生很少选择它进行持续专业发展(CPD),原因尚不清楚。本研究的目的是探讨基于模拟的CPD的现有证据以及影响医生参与基于模拟的CPD的因素。方法:对MEDLINE、Embase和CINAHL数据库中基于模拟的CPD的文献进行范围审查。包括在执业医师CPD中使用模拟的研究。与参与基于模拟的CPD的动机、研究目标、研究问题、基本原理、使用模拟的原因和模拟特征相关的信息被抽象出来。结果:共检索到8609篇文章,其中6906篇文章在去除重复后进行了标题和摘要筛选。661篇文章进行了全文筛选。对225项研究(1993-2021)进行了数据提取。只有4项研究直接探讨了医生的动机,而31项研究描述了用于招募医生参加基于模拟的CPD研究的激励或策略。大多数研究都集中在利用或展示模拟对CPD的效用。有限的证据表明,心理安全、与临床实践的直接关联以及对模拟的熟悉可能会促进未来的参与。讨论:虽然模拟是一种有效的体验式教育方法,但医生将其作为CPD策略的原因尚不清楚。除非对影响医生参与基于模拟的CPD的动机和选择的个人、社会、教育或背景因素进行探索,否则模拟有效性的其他证据可能无法说服医生参与基于模拟的CPD。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
85
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Continuing Education is a quarterly journal publishing articles relevant to theory, practice, and policy development for continuing education in the health sciences. The journal presents original research and essays on subjects involving the lifelong learning of professionals, with a focus on continuous quality improvement, competency assessment, and knowledge translation. It provides thoughtful advice to those who develop, conduct, and evaluate continuing education programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信