Theory: Immersive simulation is a common mode of education for medical students. Observation of c... more Theory: Immersive simulation is a common mode of education for medical students. Observation of clinical simulations prior to participation is believed to be beneficial, though this is often a passive process. Active observation may be more beneficial. Hypotheses: The hypothesis tested in this study was that the active use of a simple checklist during observation of an immersive simulation would result in better participant performance in a subsequent scenario compared with passive observation alone. Methods: Medical students were randomized to either passive or active (with checklist) observation of an immersive simulation involving cardiac arrest prior to participating in their own simulation. Performance measures included time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and time to defibrillation and were compared between first and second scenarios as well as between passive and active observers. Results: Seventy-nine simulations involving 232 students were conducted. Mean time to CPR was 18 seconds (SD = 11.6) for those using the checklist and 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = 6 seconds), t(35) = 1.46, p = .153. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for those using the checklist and 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = -2 seconds), t(38) = .21, p = .837. Time to CPR was 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for passive observers and 31 seconds (SD = 21.0; M difference = 7 seconds), t(35) = 1.13, p = .265, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to CPR was 18 sec-Correspondence may be sent to Stuart J. onds (SD = 11.6) for active observers and 36 seconds (SD = 26.2; M difference = 18 seconds), t(24) = 2.81, p = .010, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for passive observers and 125 seconds (SD = 32.2; M difference = 33 seconds), t(33) = 3.63, p = .001, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for the active observers and 132 seconds (SD = 52.9; M difference = 38 seconds), t(28) = .46, p = .008, for their first scenario counterparts.
A learning needs analysis was performed using an online survey to establish the most appropriate ... more A learning needs analysis was performed using an online survey to establish the most appropriate curriculum for a simulation-based intensive care training programme for junior physiotherapists. Perceptions were compared between an intensive care-naïve ‘novice’ group of rotational physiotherapists from a single tertiary teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia, and an ‘expert’ group of senior intensive care physiotherapists from across Australia. The learning needs analysis survey involved two questions. Question one required participants to rank assessment topics for perceived training importance from 1 (greatest) to 6 (least). Question two required participants to select which treatment topics from a list (total 15) they felt important for further training. 14/15 (93%) of the novice group, and 15/16 (94%) of the expert group completed the surveys. The highest ranked assessment topics for both groups were assessing intubated, ventilated patients and assessment of haemodynamically unstable patients. The highest rated treatment topics for both groups were lung hyperinflation, and rehabilitation. Based on these results and practical considerations, the subsequently developed simulation-based intensive care training programme comprised four modules: general assessment of an intensive care unit patient, assessment of haemodynamically unstable patients, positioning, and lung hyperinflation.
Theory: Immersive simulation is a common mode of education for medical students. Observation of c... more Theory: Immersive simulation is a common mode of education for medical students. Observation of clinical simulations prior to participation is believed to be beneficial, though this is often a passive process. Active observation may be more beneficial. Hypotheses: The hypothesis tested in this study was that the active use of a simple checklist during observation of an immersive simulation would result in better participant performance in a subsequent scenario compared with passive observation alone. Methods: Medical students were randomized to either passive or active (with checklist) observation of an immersive simulation involving cardiac arrest prior to participating in their own simulation. Performance measures included time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and time to defibrillation and were compared between first and second scenarios as well as between passive and active observers. Results: Seventy-nine simulations involving 232 students were conducted. Mean time to CPR was 18 seconds (SD = 11.6) for those using the checklist and 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = 6 seconds), t(35) = 1.46, p = .153. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for those using the checklist and 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = -2 seconds), t(38) = .21, p = .837. Time to CPR was 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for passive observers and 31 seconds (SD = 21.0; M difference = 7 seconds), t(35) = 1.13, p = .265, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to CPR was 18 sec-Correspondence may be sent to Stuart J. onds (SD = 11.6) for active observers and 36 seconds (SD = 26.2; M difference = 18 seconds), t(24) = 2.81, p = .010, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for passive observers and 125 seconds (SD = 32.2; M difference = 33 seconds), t(33) = 3.63, p = .001, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for the active observers and 132 seconds (SD = 52.9; M difference = 38 seconds), t(28) = .46, p = .008, for their first scenario counterparts.
A learning needs analysis was performed using an online survey to establish the most appropriate ... more A learning needs analysis was performed using an online survey to establish the most appropriate curriculum for a simulation-based intensive care training programme for junior physiotherapists. Perceptions were compared between an intensive care-naïve ‘novice’ group of rotational physiotherapists from a single tertiary teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia, and an ‘expert’ group of senior intensive care physiotherapists from across Australia. The learning needs analysis survey involved two questions. Question one required participants to rank assessment topics for perceived training importance from 1 (greatest) to 6 (least). Question two required participants to select which treatment topics from a list (total 15) they felt important for further training. 14/15 (93%) of the novice group, and 15/16 (94%) of the expert group completed the surveys. The highest ranked assessment topics for both groups were assessing intubated, ventilated patients and assessment of haemodynamically unstable patients. The highest rated treatment topics for both groups were lung hyperinflation, and rehabilitation. Based on these results and practical considerations, the subsequently developed simulation-based intensive care training programme comprised four modules: general assessment of an intensive care unit patient, assessment of haemodynamically unstable patients, positioning, and lung hyperinflation.
Uploads
Papers by Robert O'Brien