Improving Medical Student Performance With Unsupervised Simulation and Remote Asynchronous Feedback

• Published in: Journal of surgical education 2024-12, Vol.81 (12), p.103302, Article 103302
• Main Authors: Varas, Julián, Belmar, Francisca, Fuentes, Javiera, Vela, Javier, Contreras, Caterina, Letelier, Luz M, Riquelme, Arnoldo, Asbun, Domenech, Abbott, Eduardo F., Escalona, Gabriel, Alseidi, Adnan, O'Sullivan, Patricia, Villagrán, Ignacio
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: asynchronous feedback; Clinical Competence; Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods; Educational Measurement; Female; Formative Feedback; Humans; Male; Paracentesis - education; Paracentesis - methods; remote feedback; Simulation; Simulation Training - methods; Students, Medical; Thoracentesis - education; Thoracentesis - methods; unsupervised training
• ISSN: 1931-7204; 1878-7452; 1878-7452
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.103302

•Simulation training is a safe approach to teaching medical students’ multiple technical skills. Among these, we can find basic procedures such as suturing, lumbar punction, thoracentesis, paracentesis, etc…•Through this study, we assessed the effectiveness of unsupervised simulation with remote asynchronous feedback, compared to an intensive workshop with in-person feedback in medical students.•Students were randomized and taught either thoracentesis or paracentesis with the prior mentioned methodologies and assessed using the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) scale.•As a result, we observed that the asynchronous educational method allowed trainees to achieve higher performance than intensive workshops. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of training medical students to perform two clinical procedures using unsupervised simulation with remote asynchronous feedback, compared to an intensive workshop with in-person feedback. Third-year medical students were recruited and randomized into 2 groups: Thoracentesis or paracentesis. Within each group, participants were further randomized into either unsupervised simulation with remote asynchronous feedback (experimental group; EG) or a 2-hour workshop (control group; CG). The EG underwent two unsupervised 20-minute training sessions and received remote asynchronous feedback. The CG had a 2-hour workshop where they received in-person feedback. After training, students were assessed using the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) scale. Twenty students in thoracentesis and 23 in paracentesis training completed the 2 training sessions with remote and asynchronous feedback, and 30 students for both thoracentesis and paracentesis groups completed the 2-hour workshop. The EG achieved a significantly higher passing rate than the CG on both procedures (thoracentesis 80% vs. 43%, paracentesis 91% vs. 67%, p-value< 0.05). The asynchronous educational method allowed EG students to achieve higher performance than CG students. This novel modality allowed students and instructors to train and assess at their own pace.