Education Research: High-Fidelity Simulation to Evaluate Diagnostic Reasoning Reveals Failure to Detect Viral Encephalitis in Medical Trainees

Melissa B. Pergakis, Wan-Tsu W. Chang, Camilo A. Gutierrez, Benjamin Neustein, Jamie E. Podell, Gunjan Y. Parikh, N. Badjatia, Melissa Motta, David P. Lerner, Nicholas A. Morris
{"title":"Education Research: High-Fidelity Simulation to Evaluate Diagnostic Reasoning Reveals Failure to Detect Viral Encephalitis in Medical Trainees","authors":"Melissa B. Pergakis, Wan-Tsu W. Chang, Camilo A. Gutierrez, Benjamin Neustein, Jamie E. Podell, Gunjan Y. Parikh, N. Badjatia, Melissa Motta, David P. Lerner, Nicholas A. Morris","doi":"10.1212/ne9.0000000000200020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Delays in treatment of both herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis and seizures are associated with poor patient outcomes, but many physicians fail to recognize HSV despite classic presenting symptoms. Our goal was to assess trainee performance in a simulation-based case to recognize HSV encephalitis as the underlying etiology of refractory status epilepticus.This is a prospective, observational, single-center simulation-based study of participants ranging from subinterns to attending physicians managing a patient with viral encephalitis complicated by nonconvulsive status epilepticus. Using a modified Delphi approach, we developed a list of critical actions. The primary outcome measure was critical action item sum score. We compared level of training and performance using analysis of variance as validity evidence to support our findings.Fifty-nine trainees completed the simulation. The mean sum of critical actions completed was 13.9/25 (56%). Eighty percent of trainees administered an appropriately dosed benzodiazepine, and 97% administered a second-line agent. Despite 88% of trainees obtaining a lumbar puncture, only 47% recognized viral encephalitis as the most likely diagnosis with 36% starting appropriate treatment. There was significant effect of training level on critical action sum score (level 1 mean score [SD] = 10.8 [1.5] vs level 2 mean score [SD] = 12.2 [2.5] vs level 3 mean score [SD] = 13.9 [3.0] vs level 4 mean score [SD] = 18.2 [3.2],p< 0.001,R2= 0.38).Although initial seizure treatment was sufficient, failure to recognize HSV encephalitis was common with few trainees initiating appropriate treatment potentially leading to poor outcomes in real-life scenarios. High-fidelity simulation holds promise as an assessment tool in identifying trainee knowledge gaps and why classic clinical cases escape trainee diagnosis.","PeriodicalId":273801,"journal":{"name":"Neurology: Education","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology: Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/ne9.0000000000200020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Delays in treatment of both herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis and seizures are associated with poor patient outcomes, but many physicians fail to recognize HSV despite classic presenting symptoms. Our goal was to assess trainee performance in a simulation-based case to recognize HSV encephalitis as the underlying etiology of refractory status epilepticus.This is a prospective, observational, single-center simulation-based study of participants ranging from subinterns to attending physicians managing a patient with viral encephalitis complicated by nonconvulsive status epilepticus. Using a modified Delphi approach, we developed a list of critical actions. The primary outcome measure was critical action item sum score. We compared level of training and performance using analysis of variance as validity evidence to support our findings.Fifty-nine trainees completed the simulation. The mean sum of critical actions completed was 13.9/25 (56%). Eighty percent of trainees administered an appropriately dosed benzodiazepine, and 97% administered a second-line agent. Despite 88% of trainees obtaining a lumbar puncture, only 47% recognized viral encephalitis as the most likely diagnosis with 36% starting appropriate treatment. There was significant effect of training level on critical action sum score (level 1 mean score [SD] = 10.8 [1.5] vs level 2 mean score [SD] = 12.2 [2.5] vs level 3 mean score [SD] = 13.9 [3.0] vs level 4 mean score [SD] = 18.2 [3.2],p< 0.001,R2= 0.38).Although initial seizure treatment was sufficient, failure to recognize HSV encephalitis was common with few trainees initiating appropriate treatment potentially leading to poor outcomes in real-life scenarios. High-fidelity simulation holds promise as an assessment tool in identifying trainee knowledge gaps and why classic clinical cases escape trainee diagnosis.
教育研究:评估诊断推理的高保真模拟揭示了医学实习生无法检测病毒性脑炎
单纯疱疹病毒(HSV)脑炎和癫痫发作的治疗延误与患者预后差有关,但许多医生未能识别HSV,尽管有经典的表现症状。我们的目标是在一个基于模拟的病例中评估受训者的表现,以识别HSV脑炎是难治性癫痫持续状态的潜在病因。这是一项前瞻性、观察性、基于单中心模拟的研究,参与者包括副实习生和主治医生,他们治疗了一例病毒性脑炎合并非惊厥性癫痫持续状态的患者。使用改进的德尔菲方法,我们制定了一个关键行动列表。主要结果测量是关键行动项目的总得分。我们比较了训练水平和表现,使用方差分析作为有效性证据来支持我们的发现。59名学员完成了模拟。完成的关键动作的平均总和为13.9/25(56%)。80%的受训者服用适当剂量的苯二氮卓类药物,97%的受训者服用二线药物。尽管88%的受训者接受了腰椎穿刺,但只有47%的人认为病毒性脑炎是最可能的诊断,36%的人开始了适当的治疗。训练水平对关键动作总和得分有显著影响(一级平均得分[SD] = 10.8 [1.5] vs二级平均得分[SD] = 12.2 [2.5] vs三级平均得分[SD] = 13.9 [3.0] vs四级平均得分[SD] = 18.2 [3.2],p< 0.001,R2= 0.38)。虽然最初的癫痫治疗是足够的,但未能识别HSV脑炎是很常见的,很少有受训者开始适当的治疗,这可能导致现实生活中不良的结果。高保真模拟有望作为评估工具,在确定学员知识差距和为什么经典临床病例逃避学员诊断。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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