Midwestern University College of Pharmacy-Glendale, AZ 85308, USA.
Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 Apr 12;77(3):59. doi: 10.5688/ajpe77359.
OBJECTIVE. To determine whether a high-fidelity simulation technique compared with lecture would produce greater improvement in advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) knowledge, confidence, and overall satisfaction with the training method. DESIGN. This sequential, parallel-group, crossover trial randomized students into 2 groups distinguished by the sequence of teaching technique delivered for ACLS instruction (ie, classroom lecture vs high-fidelity simulation exercise). ASSESSMENT. Test scores on a written examination administered at baseline and after each teaching technique improved significantly from baseline in all groups but were highest when lecture was followed by simulation. Simulation was associated with a greater degree of overall student satisfaction compared with lecture. Participation in a simulation exercise did not improve pharmacy students' knowledge of ACLS more than attending a lecture, but it was associated with improved student confidence in skills and satisfaction with learning and application. CONCLUSIONS. College curricula should incorporate simulation to complement but not replace lecture for ACLS education.
目的。比较高保真模拟技术与讲座，以确定哪种方法能更有效地提高高级心脏生命支持（ACLS）知识、信心和对培训方法的总体满意度。设计。本序贯、平行组、交叉试验将学生随机分为 2 组，通过教授 ACLS 指导的教学技术（即课堂讲座与高保真模拟练习）的顺序来区分。评估。在基线和每种教学技术后进行的书面考试中，所有组的测试分数均较基线显著提高，但在讲座后进行模拟时得分最高。与讲座相比，模拟更能提高学生对整体教学的满意度。与参加讲座相比，模拟练习并不能提高药学学生对 ACLS 的知识，但它与提高学生对技能的信心以及对学习和应用的满意度有关。结论。学院课程应将模拟纳入 ACLS 教育中，以补充而非替代讲座。
