MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4307743462 · doi:10.7759/cureus.30929

Development of Simple and Advanced Adult Proximal Tibia Simulators for a Decentralized Simulation-Based Education Model to Teach Paramedics-in-Training the Intraosseous Infusion Procedure

2022· article· en· W4307743462 sur OpenAlexaff
Mithusa Sivanathan, Luz Yanguez Franco, Shitij Joshi, Julia Micallef, Dale Button, Adam Dubrowski

Notice bibliographique

RevueCureus · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyDurham College
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineHealth careSimulation trainingSimulationMedical educationMedical emergencyMedical physicsComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, public health had advised practicing social distancing which led to the temporary shutdown of simulation laboratories or centralized simulation-based education model, shared spaces that healthcare workers such as paramedics use to train on important hands-on clinical skills for the job. One such skill is intraosseous (IO) access and infusion, the delivery of fluids and medication through the marrow or medullary cavity of the bone which provides fast and direct entry into the central venous system. This skill is critical in emergencies when peripheral access is not immediately available. To continue the training of paramedics in life-saving skills like IO infusion in the post-pandemic era, a decentralized simulation-based education (De-SBE) model was proposed. The De-SBE relies on the availability of inexpensive and flexible simulators that can be used by learners outside of the simulation laboratory. However, to date, there is a paucity of simulation design methods that stimulate creativity and ideation, and at the same time, provide evidence of validity for these simulators. Our exploratory research aimed to test a novel approach that combines components of development-related constraints, ideation, and consensus (CIC) approach to develop and provide content validity for simulators to be used in a De-SBE model. Materials and methods The development of the IO simulators was constrained to follow a design-to-cost approach. First, a modified design thinking session was conducted with three informants from paramedicine and medicine to gather ideas for the development of two IO simulators (simple and advanced). Next, to sort through, refine, and generate early evidence of the content validity of the simulators, the initial ideas were integrated into a two-round, modified Delphi process driven by seven informants from paramedicine and medicine. In addition, we surveyed the participants on how well they liked the CIC approach. Results The CIC approach generated a list of mandatory and optional features that could be added to the IO simulators. Specifically, six features (one mandatory and four optional) for the existing simple IO simulator and eight (three mandatories and five optional) for the advanced IO simulators were identified. Following a design-to-cost approach, the features classified as mandatory for the simple and advanced IO simulators were integrated into the final designs to maintain the feasibility of production for training purposes. The surveys with the participants showed that the CIC approach worked well in the group setting by allowing for various perspectives to be shared freely and ending with a list of features for IO simulator designs that could be used in the future. Some improvements to the approach included flagging for potential users to determine what works best concerning the mode of delivery (online or in person), and duration of the stages to allow for more idea generation. Conclusion The CIC approach led to the manufacturing of simple and advanced IO simulators that would suit a training plan catered to teach the IO access and infusion procedure decentrally to paramedics-in-training. Specifically, they have been designed in a manner that allows them to be made easily accessible to the trainees i.e., low costs and high mobility, and work cohesively with online learning management systems which further facilitates the use of a De-SBE model.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,067
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,791

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,043
Tête enseignante GPT0,378
Écart entre enseignants0,335 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCureusMême sujetSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareTravaux en français237 207