Comparison of medical student responses and course achievement according to different types of patient simulations in an introductory advanced life support course.

PURPOSE

The optimal type of patient simulation for different levels of learners has not been extensively studied. The purpose of the study was to compare preclerkship medical student responses and course achievement according to different types of patient simulations in an introductory advanced life support (IALS) course.

METHODS

A full-day, simulation-based IALS course was developed for preclerkship medical students who attended a four-week introduction to a clinical medicine program. One hundred eighteen students were trained in three days. Onsite interactive simulation with verbal debriefing (interactive type) was applied on the first day, and full-mission, realistic simulation with video-assisted debriefing (realistic type) was applied on the second and third days. At the end of course, students evaluated the course and their simulation experiences and completed a written post-test.

RESULTS

Student responses to the course and patient simulations were very positive. Students who experienced the realistic type of patient simulations more highly rated in realistic experiences, such as patient care, than the interactive type group (3.83+/-0.88 vs. 3.41+/-0.84, p=0.018). Values for team communication training were more highly rated by students in the interactive type group than the realistic type (4.69+/-0.52 vs. 4.39+/-0.86, p=0.022). There was no significant difference in post-test scores between the two groups (realistic, 67.63+/-10.80; interactive, 66.73+/-9.93, p=0.654).

CONCLUSION

Both types of patient simulation provide valuable learning experiences to preclerkship medical students, with their own advantages in an IALS course. Onsite interactive simulation with verbal debriefing may be more cost-effective tool for preclerkship medical students.