Gannon Whitney D, Stokes John W, Pugh Meredith E, Bacchetta Matthew, Benson Clayne, Casey Jonathan D, Craig Lynne, Semler Matthew W, Shah Ashish S, Troutt Ashley, Rice Todd W
Department of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Department of Thoracic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Crit Care Med. 2022 May 1;50(5):e415-e425. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005376. Epub 2021 Oct 25.
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has become integral to critical care. Data informing optimal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education modalities are lacking. We aimed to compare the effect of high-fidelity simulation versus interactive mobile learning on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition and retention among clinicians.
Observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial.
A single academic medical center.
Forty-four critical care clinicians with limited extracorporeal membrane oxygenation experience.
Participants were randomized to receive: 1) simulation: three high-fidelity training scenarios, 2) QuizTime: 15 total multiple-choice questions delivered over 3 weeks via mobile device, or 3) experiential: no formal training. Participants completed a survey, written knowledge examination, and simulation assessment prior to randomization, immediately following the intervention, and 4 month postintervention.
The primary outcome was knowledge about extracorporeal membrane oxygenation assessed by score on the immediate postintervention written examination. Secondary outcomes included performance in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulation postintervention and 4 months later assessed by a rater blinded to group assignment. Clinicians randomized to simulation (n = 15), QuizTime (n = 14), and experiential (n = 15) had similar baseline characteristics. Adjusting for baseline knowledge, postintervention examination scores were higher in the simulation group (90.0%; interquartile range, 85.0-90.0%) than the QuizTime group (70.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.0003) and the experiential group (75.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.001). Scores did not differ between the groups at 4 months (p > 0.05 in all analyses). In postintervention extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulations, the simulation group demonstrated shorter time to critical action compared with QuizTime (80.0 s [interquartile range, 54.0-111.0 s] vs 300.0 s [interquartile range 85.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.02) and compared with both QuizTime (45.0 s [interquartile range, 34.0-92.5 s] vs 255.5 s [interquartile range, 102.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.008) and experiential (300.0 s [interquartile range, 58.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.009) at 4 months.
Simulation was superior to QuizTime and experiential learning with regard to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition. Further studies are needed to ascertain the effect of these interventions on knowledge retention, clinical performance, and patient outcomes.
体外膜肺氧合已成为重症监护的重要组成部分。目前缺乏关于最佳体外膜肺氧合教育模式的数据。我们旨在比较高保真模拟与交互式移动学习对临床医生体外膜肺氧合知识获取和保留的影响。
观察者盲法随机对照试验。
一家学术医疗中心。
44名体外膜肺氧合经验有限的重症监护临床医生。
参与者被随机分为三组:1)模拟组:进行三个高保真培训场景;2)QuizTime组:通过移动设备在3周内总共提供15道多项选择题;3)经验组:不接受正式培训。参与者在随机分组前、干预后立即以及干预后4个月完成一项调查、书面知识考试和模拟评估。
主要结局是通过干预后立即进行的书面考试成绩评估的体外膜肺氧合知识。次要结局包括干预后以及4个月后由不知道分组情况的评估者进行评估的体外膜肺氧合模拟表现。随机分为模拟组(n = 15)、QuizTime组(n = 14)和经验组(n = 15)的临床医生具有相似的基线特征。在调整基线知识后,模拟组干预后的考试成绩(90.0%;四分位间距,85.0 - 90.0%)高于QuizTime组(70.0%;四分位间距,65.0 - 80.0%;p = 0.0003)和经验组(75.0%;四分位间距,65.0 - 80.0%;p = 0.001)。4个月时各组分数无差异(所有分析中p > 0.05)。在干预后的体外膜肺氧合模拟中,模拟组与QuizTime组相比,达到关键操作的时间更短(80.0秒[四分位间距,54.0 - 111.0秒]对300.0秒[四分位间距85.0 - 300.0秒];p = 0.02),4个月时与QuizTime组(分别为45.0秒[四分位间距,34.0 - 92.5秒]对255.5秒[四分位间距,102.0 - 300.0秒];p = 0.008)和经验组(300.0秒[四分位间距,58.0 - 300.0秒];p = 0.009)相比均更短。
在体外膜肺氧合知识获取方面,模拟优于QuizTime和经验学习。需要进一步研究以确定这些干预措施对知识保留、临床性能和患者结局的影响。