Cravens Mary Grace, Benner Kim, Beall Jennifer, Worthington Mary, Denson Brenda, Youngblood Amber Q, Zinkan J Lynn, Tofil Nancy M
Children's Hospital of Georgia at Augusta University Medical Center, Augusta, Georgia.
McWhorter School of Pharmacy, Samford University, Birmingham, Alabama.
J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2016 Nov-Dec;21(6):476-485. doi: 10.5863/1551-6776-21.6.476.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the difference between education via written materials alone and written materials enhanced with hands-on simulation. A simulation case, educational module, and assessment regarding torsades de pointes (TdP) in an adolescent patient were designed. The written educational module was given to all study participants. A total of 92 third-year pharmacy students and 26 pharmacists participated in the study. When approximately half of the participants had been to simulation, an anonymous assessment was given. Responses from those who had been to simulation and those who had not, and whether they had read, skimmed or not read the educational material were compared. A non-paired Student -test compared the percentage correct and responses of individual questions between groups. Mean participant scores of those who went to simulation (70% ± 16%) were statistically significantly higher than mean scores of those who had not attended simulation (54% ± 21%; p<0.0001). Furthermore, those who attended simulation and read the module (72% ± 3%), skimmed (68% ± 13%), or did not read the module (66% ± 16%) had higher scores than those who did not attend simulation and read the module (62% ± 26%), skimmed the module (54 ± 17%) or did not read the module (51% ± 20%). Hands-on simulation significantly improved assessment scores. Overall, reading the educational module and participating in simulation yielded the best scores. Participants who attended the simulation and did not read the module had higher average scores than participants who read the educational module and did not go to simulation.
本研究的目的是评估单纯书面材料教育与结合实践模拟的书面材料教育之间的差异。设计了一个关于青少年患者尖端扭转型室速(TdP)的模拟案例、教育模块和评估。所有研究参与者都收到了书面教育模块。共有92名三年级药学专业学生和26名药剂师参与了该研究。当大约一半的参与者参加模拟后,进行了一次匿名评估。比较了参加模拟和未参加模拟的参与者的回答,以及他们是阅读、略读还是未阅读教育材料的情况。采用非配对学生t检验比较两组之间单个问题的正确百分比和回答情况。参加模拟的参与者的平均得分(70%±16%)在统计学上显著高于未参加模拟的参与者的平均得分(54%±21%;p<0.0001)。此外,参加模拟且阅读模块的参与者(72%±3%)、略读模块的参与者(68%±13%)或未阅读模块的参与者(66%±16%)的得分高于未参加模拟且阅读模块的参与者(62%±26%)、略读模块的参与者(54±17%)或未阅读模块的参与者(51%±20%)。实践模拟显著提高了评估得分。总体而言,阅读教育模块并参与模拟获得的分数最高。参加模拟但未阅读模块的参与者的平均得分高于阅读教育模块但未参加模拟的参与者。