Advertisement
-
1
Ziv A, Wolpe P, Small S, et al: Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Acad Med 78: 783, 2003.
-
2
Merriam-Webster: Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2012. Available at: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulation. Accessed June 4, 2012.
-
3
Maran N, Glavin R: Low- to high-fidelity simulation: a continuum of medical education? Med Educ 37: 22, 2003.
-
4
Gordon J, Wilkerson W, Shaffer D, et al: “Practicing” medicine without risk: student's and educators' responses to high-fidelity patient simulation. Acad Med 76: 469, 2001.
-
5
Shapiro M, Morey J, Small S, et al: Simulation based teamwork training for emergency department staff: does it improve clinical team performance when added to an existing didactic teamwork curriculum. Qual Saf Health Care 13: 417, 2004.
-
6
DeVita M, Shaefer J, Lutz J, et al: Improving medical emergency team (MET) performance using a novel curriculum and a computerized human patient simulator. Qual Saf Health Care 14: 326, 2005.
-
7
Ziv A, Ben-David S, Ziv M: Simulation based medical education: an opportunity to learn from errors. Med Teach 27: 193, 2005.
-
8
Bradley P: The history of simulation in medical education and possible future directions. Med Educ 40: 254, 2006.
-
9
Savoldelli G, Naik V, Park J, et al: Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management. Anethesiology 105: 279, 2006.
-
10
Issenberg S, McGaghie W, Petrusa E, et al: Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach 27: 10, 2005.
-
11
Muscarella VJ: The use of patient simulators in podiatric medical/surgical education. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 24: 57, 2007.
-
12
Conway FJ, Boc SF, Dacus JB: Diagnosis of a computer-simulated podiatric patient. JAPMA 81: 181, 1991.
-
13 Mendel S, Curtis D, Page JC : Interprofessional podiatric surgical simulation: a pilot study. JAPMA 105: 331, 2015.
-
14
Des Moines University: Simulation lab, 2012. Available at: http://www.dmu.edu/simulation-center/simulation-lab. Accessed June 11, 2012.
-
15
Nusbaum M, Gamble G, Skinner B, et al: The high prevalence of sexual concerns among women seeking routine gynecological care. J Fam Pract 49: 229, 2000.
-
16
Malterud K: Shared understanding of the qualitative research process: guidelines for the medical researcher. Fam Pract 10: 201, 1993.
-
17
Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS (eds): To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1999.
-
18
Kunkler K: The role of medical simulation: an overview. Int J Med Robot 2: 203, 2006.
-
19
Baker D, Day R, Salas E: Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Serv Res 41: 1576, 2006.
-
20
Rodgers D: “Development of Manikin-Based Patient Simulation Technology,” in High-Fidelity Patient Simulation: A Descriptive White Paper Report, edited by D Rodgers, p 4, Healthcare Simulation Strategies, Charleston, WV, 2007.
-
21
“Return on Investment Study for Medical Simulation Training,” Immersion Medical, Inc and Frost and Sullivan, Palo Alto, CA, 2004. Available at: http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/content/138774.pdf. Accessed May 27, 2015.
-
22
Gordon J, Oriol N, Cooper J: Bringing good teaching cases “to life”: a simulator-based medical education service. Acad Med 79: 23, 2004.
The Students' Perspective in Examining the Use of High-Fidelity Simulators in a Podiatric Medical Curriculum
Search for other papers by Kevin M. Smith in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Simon Geletta in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Christopher Juels in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background
We sought to assess the perceptions that podiatric medical students had of the use of simulators after completing a third-year simulation rotation. This type of analysis has not been reported in the podiatric medicine educational literature. Another goal of this study was to influence the podiatric medical community to increase studies that help demonstrate the effectiveness of simulation in the podiatric medical curriculum.
Methods
Data from rotation evaluations of 44 students from the 2011-2012 academic year included student responses to 11 quantitative items and textual analysis of the students' written comments. Basic descriptive statistics of student responses to the quantitative items allowed for the analysis of central tendencies and variations. Textual analysis was performed on comments that were coded into themes based on similar properties and characteristics that the comments shared.
Results
The analysis revealed that the simulation sessions were well liked. All of the students who responded to the survey rated the overall simulation rotation as “superior.” Textual analysis of the students' comments showed that students enjoy simulation as an educational tool because it helps enhance their clinical skills while also applying their didactic education to a practical experience. Clear evidence was presented that students want more cases and time to spend in the simulation laboratory to continue increasing their medical skills.
Conclusions
The student perception of simulation is that it is an effective educational tool. Further testing is needed to prove simulation efficacy in a podiatric medical curriculum.
