Open AccessSimulation in Otolaryngology Education: A Systematic Review of the Peer‐Reviewed Evidence
Author(s) -
Sardesai Maya G.,
Kim Sara,
Whipple Mark
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
otolaryngology–head and neck surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.232
H-Index - 121
eISSN - 1097-6817
pISSN - 0194-5998
DOI - 10.1177/0194599811416318a53
Subject(s) - otorhinolaryngology , systematic review , medical education , outcome (game theory) , evidence based medicine , fidelity , subject (documents) , medicine , medical physics , computer science , medline , alternative medicine , surgery , telecommunications , mathematics , mathematical economics , pathology , library science , political science , law
Objective Systematically synthesize the peer‐reviewed evidence for use of simulation in otolaryngology education. Method A systematic review of the peer‐reviewed literature was performed to identify evidence for use of simulation in otolaryngology education. Identified articles were analyzed by three independent coders across 19 parameters encompassing study methodology, simulator information, subject information, skills taught, and outcome measures. Results Level V evidence dominates the peer‐reviewed literature. Medical knowledge is the ACGME core competency most frequently taught. Many subspecialties within otolaryngology are underrepresented. Most simulators consist of anatomical models, and most studied simulators are high‐fidelity simulators. Most studies lack a control group, and most do not use validated outcome measures. Education theory is underused. However, most studies conclude that the device employed or described is effective. Conclusion While there is a modest amount of peer‐reviewed evidence for the use of simulation in otolaryngology education, there remain many gaps that translate to opportunities for academic otolaryngologists.