Effectiveness of different numbers of simulation training models on medical students’ cervical examination performance

Objective To estimate whether different numbers of simulation training models affect medical students’ cervical examination performance. Methods In a prospective study at Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China, between August 1, 2016, and April 30, 2017, fifth‐year medical students without obstetric experience were randomly assigned to the large or small number training groups. Participants in the large number group performed cervical examinations on 10 dilation models and nine effacement/consistency models; those in the small number group practiced on four dilation models and three effacement/consistency models. In the examination, both groups evaluated 10 models in the same sequence and reported findings. Participants also completed confidence surveys. Mann‐Whitney U test was used to compare the assessment accuracy and confidence improvement between the groups. Results There were 91 students randomized to the large (n=45) or small (n=46) number training groups. As compared with the small number group, the large number group demonstrated higher accuracy in assessing exact dilation ( P =0.028), exact effacement ( P =0.002), effacement within 0.5 cm ( P =0.017), and consistency ( P =0.045). There was no difference in assessing dilation within 1 cm or in confidence improvement between the groups. Conclusion A small number of simulation training models was sufficient to improve students’ accuracy and confidence in assessing cervical dilatation, although a large number was needed to improve accuracy in cervical effacement and consistency.