Achieving Reliable Mastery of Emergency Airway Management Skills Through 4-Component Instructional Design: A Mixed Methods Pilot Evaluation.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Fil Gilic, Robert McGraw, Joseph Newbigging, Elizabeth Blackmore, Matthew Stacey, Colin Mercer, Troy Neufeld, Erika Johannessen, Wilson Lam, Ryan Hall, Heather Braund
{"title":"Achieving Reliable Mastery of Emergency Airway Management Skills Through 4-Component Instructional Design: A Mixed Methods Pilot Evaluation.","authors":"Fil Gilic, Robert McGraw, Joseph Newbigging, Elizabeth Blackmore, Matthew Stacey, Colin Mercer, Troy Neufeld, Erika Johannessen, Wilson Lam, Ryan Hall, Heather Braund","doi":"10.1097/SIH.0000000000000847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We used cognitive load theory to design the Queen's University Airway Mastery (QUMAC) pilot course to work toward reliable mastery of Emergency Airways Management elements in all participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We describe the process of designing QUMAC using 4-Component Instructional Design to harness the cognitive load theory as a learning tool. We evaluated the effectiveness of QUMAC using an outcome-based mixed-methods approach including Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) and 2 Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) at course completion using blinded expert video review. We also conducted semistructured interviews at course completion and after 6 months of independent practice. Interviews were analyzed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean OSCE Global Performance Scores were 4.1 (±0.56) of 5 for both OSCE scores; and 4.0-4.4 (±0.48-0.89) on OSATS. At course completion, 4 themes were identified: Overall Experience with the Course, Facilitators of Performance, Recommendations, and Transfer to Practice. At 6 months of independent practice 5 themes emerged: Level of Confidence, Management of Cognitive Load, Persistence, Barriers to Application, and Recommendations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All participants demonstrated a high degree of competence when assessed by OSCEs and majority did so with the OSATS. All noticed an increase in confidence and reduced cognitive load while managing airways. These persisted over 6 months of independent practice where the participants were actively managing airways as staff physicians in new workplaces. High performance expectations, automation, schemas, spaced repetition, and homework were the elements most associated with better performance and more confidence. Decreased cognitive load freed up resources for higher order thinking, while the overall sense of competence reduced the anxiety of going to work as a new emergency department staff.</p>","PeriodicalId":49517,"journal":{"name":"Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000847","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: We used cognitive load theory to design the Queen's University Airway Mastery (QUMAC) pilot course to work toward reliable mastery of Emergency Airways Management elements in all participants.

Methods: We describe the process of designing QUMAC using 4-Component Instructional Design to harness the cognitive load theory as a learning tool. We evaluated the effectiveness of QUMAC using an outcome-based mixed-methods approach including Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) and 2 Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) at course completion using blinded expert video review. We also conducted semistructured interviews at course completion and after 6 months of independent practice. Interviews were analyzed thematically.

Results: Mean OSCE Global Performance Scores were 4.1 (±0.56) of 5 for both OSCE scores; and 4.0-4.4 (±0.48-0.89) on OSATS. At course completion, 4 themes were identified: Overall Experience with the Course, Facilitators of Performance, Recommendations, and Transfer to Practice. At 6 months of independent practice 5 themes emerged: Level of Confidence, Management of Cognitive Load, Persistence, Barriers to Application, and Recommendations.

Conclusions: All participants demonstrated a high degree of competence when assessed by OSCEs and majority did so with the OSATS. All noticed an increase in confidence and reduced cognitive load while managing airways. These persisted over 6 months of independent practice where the participants were actively managing airways as staff physicians in new workplaces. High performance expectations, automation, schemas, spaced repetition, and homework were the elements most associated with better performance and more confidence. Decreased cognitive load freed up resources for higher order thinking, while the overall sense of competence reduced the anxiety of going to work as a new emergency department staff.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
158
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare is a multidisciplinary publication encompassing all areas of applications and research in healthcare simulation technology. The journal is relevant to a broad range of clinical and biomedical specialties, and publishes original basic, clinical, and translational research on these topics and more: Safety and quality-oriented training programs; Development of educational and competency assessment standards; Reports of experience in the use of simulation technology; Virtual reality; Epidemiologic modeling; Molecular, pharmacologic, and disease modeling.
×
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