Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice?

IF 1.1 Q2 Social Sciences
Ciara Carpenter, Tom Keegan, Gill Vince, L. Brewster
{"title":"Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice?","authors":"Ciara Carpenter, Tom Keegan, Gill Vince, L. Brewster","doi":"10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction The transition from medical student to doctor has long been a source of concern, with widespread reporting of new graduates’ lack of preparedness for medical practice. Simulation has been suggested as a way to improve preparedness, particularly due to the difficulties in allowing full autonomy for patient care for undergraduate medical students. Few studies look at simulation alone for this purpose, and no studies have compared different simulation formats to assess their impact on preparedness. Methods This mixed-method study looked at two different simulation courses in two UK universities. Data were collected in two phases: immediately after the simulation and 3–4 months into the same students’ postgraduate training. Questionnaires provided quantitative data measuring preparedness and interviews provided a more in-depth analysis of experiential learning across final year and how this contributed to preparedness. Results There were no significant differences between the two courses for overall preparedness, stress or views on simulation, and no significant differences in opinions longitudinally. Although the study initially set out to look at simulation alone, emergent qualitative findings emphasised experiential learning as key in both clinical and simulated settings. This inter-relationship between simulation and the student assistantship prepared students for practice. Longitudinally, the emphasis on experiential learning in simulation was maintained and participants demonstrated using skills they had practised in simulation in their daily practice as doctors. Nevertheless, there was evidence that although students felt prepared, they were still scared about facing certain scenarios as foundation doctors. Discussion The results of this study suggest that simulation may positively affect students’ preparedness for practice as doctors. Simulation will never be a replacement for real clinical experience. However, when used prior to and alongside clinical experience, it may have positive effects on new doctors’ confidence and competence, and, therefore, positively impact patient care.","PeriodicalId":44757,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"89 1","pages":"510 - 516"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Introduction The transition from medical student to doctor has long been a source of concern, with widespread reporting of new graduates’ lack of preparedness for medical practice. Simulation has been suggested as a way to improve preparedness, particularly due to the difficulties in allowing full autonomy for patient care for undergraduate medical students. Few studies look at simulation alone for this purpose, and no studies have compared different simulation formats to assess their impact on preparedness. Methods This mixed-method study looked at two different simulation courses in two UK universities. Data were collected in two phases: immediately after the simulation and 3–4 months into the same students’ postgraduate training. Questionnaires provided quantitative data measuring preparedness and interviews provided a more in-depth analysis of experiential learning across final year and how this contributed to preparedness. Results There were no significant differences between the two courses for overall preparedness, stress or views on simulation, and no significant differences in opinions longitudinally. Although the study initially set out to look at simulation alone, emergent qualitative findings emphasised experiential learning as key in both clinical and simulated settings. This inter-relationship between simulation and the student assistantship prepared students for practice. Longitudinally, the emphasis on experiential learning in simulation was maintained and participants demonstrated using skills they had practised in simulation in their daily practice as doctors. Nevertheless, there was evidence that although students felt prepared, they were still scared about facing certain scenarios as foundation doctors. Discussion The results of this study suggest that simulation may positively affect students’ preparedness for practice as doctors. Simulation will never be a replacement for real clinical experience. However, when used prior to and alongside clinical experience, it may have positive effects on new doctors’ confidence and competence, and, therefore, positively impact patient care.
最后一年的模拟训练是否能让应届毕业生对现实的专业实践做好更充分的准备?
从医学生到医生的转变长期以来一直是一个令人担忧的问题,广泛报道新毕业生缺乏医疗实践的准备。有人建议,模拟是改进准备工作的一种方式,特别是考虑到医科本科生难以完全自主地照顾病人。很少有研究将模拟单独用于这一目的,也没有研究比较不同的模拟格式来评估它们对准备工作的影响。方法这项混合方法研究着眼于两所英国大学的两种不同的模拟课程。数据的收集分为两个阶段:模拟结束后和同一学生3-4个月的研究生培训。问卷调查提供了衡量准备情况的定量数据,访谈提供了对最后一年体验式学习的更深入分析,以及这对准备工作的贡献。结果两门课程在整体准备、压力、模拟观点上无显著差异,在纵向观点上无显著差异。虽然这项研究最初只着眼于模拟,但新兴的定性研究结果强调了体验式学习在临床和模拟环境中的关键作用。这种模拟和学生助教之间的相互关系为学生的实践做好了准备。纵向上,强调模拟中的体验式学习,参与者在他们作为医生的日常实践中展示了他们在模拟中练习的技能。然而,有证据表明,尽管学生们觉得自己做好了准备,但他们仍然害怕作为基础医生面对某些情况。本研究结果显示,模拟训练对学生实习前的准备有正面影响。模拟永远不会取代真实的临床经验。然而,当在临床经验之前和与临床经验一起使用时,它可能对新医生的信心和能力产生积极影响,因此,对患者护理产生积极影响。
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
BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning
BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
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