首页> 外文期刊>Journal of perinatology: Official journal of the California Perinatal Association >High-fidelity simulator technology may not be superior to traditional low-fidelity equipment for neonatal resuscitation training
【24h】

High-fidelity simulator technology may not be superior to traditional low-fidelity equipment for neonatal resuscitation training

机译:高保真模拟器技术可能无法优于传统的低保真新生儿呼吸训练设备

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objective: Despite completing accredited resuscitation training, neonatal trainees often feel unprepared to deal with real-life clinical emergencies. High-fidelity simulator (HFS) technology offers the potential of recreating a realistic stressful clinical environment to aid training and evaluation. To date, there are limited data examining the physiological impact of this training modality in comparison to less costly alternatives. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of low-fidelity simulator (LFS) versus HFS technology on performance levels, objective and subjective measures of stress in neonatal trainees. Study Design: Sixteen neonatal fellows were invited to participate in a prospective randomized study. Subjects were divided into pairs and randomized to LFS or HFS for completion of scenario I. After an interval of 1 month, fellow teams crossed over to complete scenario II using the alternative simulator technology. Technical and non-technical skills were assessed using validated resuscitation scoring tools. Participants recorded subjective stress at sequential time points before and after each simulation. Buccal cortisol was measured at each corresponding time point and comparison between HFS and LFS groups was made. Result: The mean overall resuscitation performance score was 75.8%±10, but there was no difference in performance between HFS and LFS groups. There was also no significant difference in non-technical skills performance between groups. Salivary cortisol increased over the duration of the simulated experience, but there were no differences between the two groups (P=0.001, two-way repeated measures analysis of variance). We also identified changes in subjective measures of stress (P<0.001, analysis of variance) over time, but again there were no differences between groups. Conclusion: Simulated neonatal resuscitations induce a significant stress response in neonatal trainees; however, we were unable to identify any difference in stress measures between HFS and LFS. These data suggest that HFS technology offers no additional stress-inducing benefit.
机译:目的:尽管完成了授权的复苏培训,但新生学员经常感到自己没有准备好应对现实生活中的临床紧急情况。高保真模拟器(HFS)技术提供了重新创建逼真的压力临床环境以帮助培训和评估的潜力。迄今为止,与成本较低的替代方案相比,仅有有限的数据检查了这种训练方式的生理影响。这项研究的目的是比较低保真模拟器(LFS)和HFS技术对新生学员的表现水平,客观和主观压力指标的影响。研究设计:邀请16位新生儿研究员参加前瞻性随机研究。将受试者分为几对,并随机分配到LFS或HFS以完成方案I。在1个月的间隔后,其他团队使用替代模拟器技术越过以完成方案II。使用经过验证的复苏评分工具评估技术和非技术技能。参与者在每次模拟之前和之后的连续时间点记录主观压力。在每个相应的时间点测量颊皮质醇,并对HFS组和LFS组进行比较。结果:平均总复苏表现得分为75.8%±10,但HFS和LFS组之间的表现没有差异。两组之间的非技术技能表现也没有显着差异。唾液皮质醇在模拟过程中持续增加,但两组之间没有差异(P = 0.001,双向重复测量方差分析)。我们还确定了随时间变化的主观压力测量值的变化(P <0.001,方差分析),但两组之间也没有差异。结论:模拟的新生儿复苏对新生学员产生了显着的应激反应。但是,我们无法确定HFS和LFS之间在压力测量方面的任何差异。这些数据表明,HFS技术没有提供其他诱导压力的好处。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号