Buléon C, Caton J, Park Y S, Eller S, Buyck M, Kardong-Edgren S, Walsh B M, Gross I T, Maxworthy J, Reedy G, Palaganas J C
Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Caen Normandy University Hospital, Caen, France.
Medical School, University of Caen Normandy, Caen, France.
Adv Simul (Lond). 2022 Apr 5;7(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s41077-022-00202-7.
The coronavirus pandemic continues to shake the embedded structures of traditional in-person education across all learning levels and across the globe. In healthcare simulation, the pandemic tested the innovative and technological capabilities of simulation programs, educators, operations staff, and administration. This study aimed to answer the question: What is the state of distance simulation practice in 2021?
This was an IRB-approved, 34-item open survey for any profession involved in healthcare simulation disseminated widely and internationally in seven languages from January 14, 2021, to March 3, 2021. Development followed a multistep process of expert design, testing, piloting, translation, and recruitment. The survey asked questions to understand: Who was using distance simulation? What driving factors motivated programs to initiate distance sim? For what purposes was distance sim being used? What specific types or modalities of distance simulation were occurring? How was it being used (i.e., modalities, blending of technology and resources and location)? How did the early part of the pandemic differ from the latter half of 2020 and early 2021? What information would best support future distance simulation education? Data were cleaned, compiled, and analyzed for dichotomized responses, reporting frequencies, proportions, as well as a comparison of response proportions.
From 32 countries, 618 respondents were included in the analysis. The findings included insights into the prevalence of distance simulation before, during, and after the pandemic; drivers for using distance simulation; methods and modalities of distance simulation; and staff training. The majority of respondents (70%) reported that their simulation center was conducting distance simulation. Significantly more respondents indicated long-term plans for maintaining a hybrid format (82%), relative to going back to in-person simulation (11%, p < 0.001).
This study gives a perspective into the rapid adaptation of the healthcare simulation community towards distance teaching and learning in reaction to a radical and quick change in education conditions and environment caused by COVID-19, as well as future directions to pursue understanding and support of distance simulation.
新冠疫情持续冲击着全球各级传统面授教育的固有结构。在医疗模拟领域，疫情考验了模拟项目、教育工作者、运营人员及管理人员的创新和技术能力。本研究旨在回答以下问题：2021年远程模拟实践的现状如何？
这是一项经机构审查委员会批准的开放式调查，共34个问题，面向参与医疗模拟的任何专业人员，于2021年1月14日至3月3日以七种语言在全球广泛传播。调查的开展遵循了专家设计、测试、试点、翻译和招募的多步骤流程。该调查提出问题以了解：谁在使用远程模拟？促使项目启动远程模拟的驱动因素有哪些？远程模拟用于何种目的？正在进行哪些具体类型或模式的远程模拟？其使用方式是怎样的（即模式、技术与资源的融合以及地点）？疫情前期与2020年下半年及2021年初有何不同？哪些信息最有助于支持未来的远程模拟教育？对数据进行清理、汇总，并对二分法回答、报告频率、比例以及回答比例的比较进行分析。
来自32个国家的618名受访者纳入分析。研究结果包括对疫情前、疫情期间和疫情后远程模拟的普及情况、使用远程模拟的驱动因素、远程模拟的方法和模式以及人员培训的洞察。大多数受访者（70%）报告称其模拟中心正在开展远程模拟。与回归面授模拟（11%，p < 0.001）相比，显著更多的受访者表示有维持混合模式的长期计划（82%）。
本研究展示了医疗模拟社区为应对新冠疫情导致的教育条件和环境的急剧快速变化，对远程教学和学习的快速适应情况，以及未来在理解和支持远程模拟方面应遵循的方向。
