Premium
Adaptive change in simulation education: Comparison of effectiveness of a communication skill curriculum on death notification using in‐person methods versus a digital communication platform
Author(s) -
Hughes Mary,
Gerstner Brett,
Bona Anna,
Falvo Lauren,
Schroedle Karen,
Cooper Dylan,
Sarmiento Elisa,
Hobgood Cherri,
Ahmed Rami
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
aem education and training
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.49
H-Index - 9
ISSN - 2472-5390
DOI - 10.1002/aet2.10610
Subject(s) - curriculum , test (biology) , medical education , wilcoxon signed rank test , psychology , computer science , medicine , pedagogy , paleontology , biology
Abstract Background Mandates to social distance and “shelter in place” during the COVID‐19 pandemic necessitated the exploration of new academic content delivery methods. Digital communication platforms (DCP; e.g., Zoom) were widely used to facilitate content delivery, yet little is known about DCP’s capacity or effectiveness, especially for simulation. Objective The objective was to compare the experience, outcomes, and resources required to implement a simulation‐based communication skill curriculum on death notification to a cohort of learners using in‐person versus DCP delivery of the same content. Methods We used the GRIEV_ING mnemonic to train students in death notification techniques either in person or utilizing a DCP. For all learners, three measures were collected: knowledge, confidence, and performance. Individual learners completed knowledge and confidence assessments pre‐ and postintervention. All performance assessments were completed by standardized patients (SPs) in real time. Wilcoxon rank‐sum test was used to identify differences in individual and between‐group performances. Results Thirty‐four learners participated (N = 34), 22 in person and 12 via DCP. There was a statistically significant improvement in both groups for all three measures: knowledge, confidence, and performance. Between‐group comparisons revealed a difference in pretest confidence but no differences between groups in knowledge or performance. More preparation and prior planning were required to set up the DCP environment than the in‐person event. Conclusions The in‐person and DCP delivery of death notification training were comparable in their ability to improve individual knowledge, confidence, and performance. Additional preparation time, training, and practice with DCPs may be required for SPs, faculty, and learners less familiar with this technology.