Podcasting as a Learning Tool in Medical Education: Prior to and During the Pandemic Period

Podcasting as a Learning Tool in Medical Education: Before and During the Pandemic Period Podcasts have seen significant growth as a medium for medical education over the last 15 years. The COVID-19 pandemic altered the way in which medical education is delivered to learners, including medical students, resident physicians, fellows, and practicing clinicians in the form of continuing medical education. A literature search using Google Scholar, PubMed, and NCBI was conducted to analyze and discuss how podcasts are utilized in medical education-both before and during the pandemic-and how this form of asynchronous education may influence clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. Finally, this review discusses how learners' habits while using podcasts may affect the way in which the information is internalized and the future of using podcasts to supplement medical education.

Feasibility Study of a Fully Synchronous Virtual Critical Care Elective Focused on Learner Engagement.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted clinical education for medical students. With the rise of variants, meaningful in-person clinical experiences remain threatened. This report describes the design, implementation, and evaluation of a fully synchronous virtual critical care elective for medical students focused on learner engagement. METHODS: The two-week elective was offered during June and July 2020 in the COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) unit. Medical students remotely participated in multidisciplinary rounds with the attending physician connected from the bedside via a head-mounted camera providing the first-person video view. Other team members connected outside the negative pressure area. Learners electronically completed daily intensive care unit (ICU) goals sheet (GS) for each patient. The daily completion percentage of the GS assessed the learner engagement, and the learners evaluated the experience with a five-point Likert scale survey. RESULTS: Nine medical students participated in two separate cohorts. Cohort A had 53 patient encounters, and Cohort B had 45 patient encounters totaling 301.5 total hours of supervised virtual patient interaction. The mean completion percentage of the daily ICU GS for the combined cohorts was 77.8%, (with a standard deviation of 9.6%), with sustained or increased completion from start to finish for all learners. All medical students agreed that the daily ICU GS was helpful for following rounds, organizing patient assessments and plans, and participating in patient care. The majority (88.9%) agreed that the elective increased their comfort in caring for critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a fully synchronous virtual critical care elective successfully utilized the first-person view and daily ICU GS to promote and assess learner engagement.

Practice what you teach: An approach to integrate airway education for experienced anesthesia clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted clinician education. To address this challenge, our divisional difficult airway program (AirEquip) designed and implemented small-group educational workshops for experienced clinicians. Our primary aim was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a small-group, flexible-curriculum skills workshop conducted during the clinical workday. Secondary objectives were to evaluate whether our workshop increased confidence in performing relevant skills and to assess the work-effort required for the new program. METHODS: We implemented a 1:1 and 2:1 (participant to facilitator ratio) airway skills workshop for experienced clinicians during the workday. A member of the AirEquip team temporarily relieved the attendee of clinical duties to facilitate participation. Attendance was encouraged but not required. Feasibility was assessed by clinician attendance, and acceptability was assessed using three Likert scale questions and derived from free-response feedback. Participants completed pre and postworkshop surveys to assess familiarity and comfort with various aspects of airway management. A work-effort analysis was conducted and compared to the effort to run a previously held larger-format difficult airway conference. RESULTS: Fifteen workshops were conducted over 7 weeks; members of AirEquip were able to temporarily assume participants' clinical duties. Forty-seven attending anesthesiologists and 17 CRNAs attended the workshops, compared with six attending anesthesiologists and five CRNAs who attended the most recent larger-format conference. There was no change in confidence after workshop participation, but participants overwhelmingly expressed enthusiasm and satisfaction with the workshops. The number of facilitator person-hours required to operate the workshops (105 h) was similar to that required to run a single all-day larger-format conference (104.5 h). CONCLUSION: It is feasible and acceptable to incorporate expert-led skills training into the clinical workday. Alongside conferences and large-format instruction, this modality enhances the way we are able to share knowledge with our colleagues. This concept can likely be applied to other skills in various clinical settings.

A novel approach to operating room readiness for airborne precautions using simulation-based clinical systems testing.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of the COVID-19 disease as a global pandemic caused major challenges and strained busy operating room environments. This required institutions to rethink current system functioning and urgently develop safe medical practices and protocols. PURPOSE: To use a novel approach combining simulation-based clinical system testing with rapid cycle deliberate practice concepts for identifying latent safety threats presented by newly developed operating room COVID-19 protocols and collecting frontline staff recommendations for mitigation. METHODS: This study design combined a training/education approach with probing the systems function. The primary outcomes were the number of latent safety threats and staff evaluations of this approach for feasibility and utility on immediate and four-month post surveys. Participants started the simulation which took place in the operating room, in the assistant role before graduating to the primary airway manager. Simulation staff members observed the simulations and noted whether elements in the protocols/checklists were followed and whether latent safety threats were present using an observation form. Solutions to latent safety threats were sought during the debriefing period. RESULTS: This approach identified 17 latent safety threats not foreseen during the planning stages and allowed for corrections to the protocols prior to impacting patient outcomes. Post-simulation surveys indicated that the program was well received and all who responded agreed that it was worth the time it took. Fifty-seven percent of respondents to four-month follow-up survey reported using the work products to care for an actual COVID-19 patient. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a flexible methodology that effectively integrated simulation-based training and systems tests to train staff and detect latent safety threats in the new workflows and provide recommendations for mitigation. While COVID was the specific prompt, this approach can be applicable in diverse clinical settings for training medical staff, testing system function, and mitigating potential latent safety threats.

Resident Preparation for the American Board of Anesthesiology Objective Standardized Clinical Examination: A Comparison of Virtual Telesimulation With In-person Simulation.

BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is part of the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) certification process. A simulated OSCE can aid examination preparation, but the COVID-19 pandemic prevented in-person simulation training. Therefore, we adapted our in-person simulated OSCE (SOSCE) as a Zoom-based telesimulation OSCE (ZOSCE), permitting examinees to participate remotely. Comparing this process with historical in-person SOSCE cohorts, we hypothesized that this telesimulation-based format would still be well received by the trainees as a substitute when it was not possible to provide in-person practice and formative assessment. Subsequently, the ABA proposed a virtual-format OSCE. METHODS: We conducted our 7-station ZOSCE according to the ABA content outline for all graduating third-year clinical anesthesia residents (CA-3) in 2020. From a main meeting room, the facilitator paired each CA-3 with a faculty proctor, assigned them to their own breakout room for each station, and rotated standardized patients in. The faculty proctor observed the CA-3's performance in real time using an assessment tool with objectives graded on a 0-2 scale. At the conclusion of the ZOSCE, proctors reviewed the assessment tool with the CA-3 and provided personalized global feedback. Assessment tool scores were used to calculate performance data for the study group that were compared with a SOSCE historical cohort from 2017 and 2018. All parties completed a Likert-style evaluation specific to the ZOSCE. RESULTS: A total of 22 CA-3 residents participated. Mean performance scores ranged from 82.2%-94.9% (minimum = 38%, maximum = 100%). Compared with the historical SOSCE cohort, ZOSCE scores for 5 of 7 stations were not different, but scores in communication with professionals (P = .007) and ultrasound (P < .001) stations were lower. Overall, CA-3 participants rated the learning experience positively and felt it was a reasonable substitution for in-person simulation, with responses similar to those of a historical in-person SOSCE cohort. CONCLUSIONS: A telesimulation-based practice ZOSCE for formative examination preparation for the ABA OSCE resulted in similar institutional scoring for most stations compared with in-person SOSCE, but some stations may be better practiced in person or require modifications. The virtual format may permit flexible scheduling during nonclinical times or for learners in remote locations. These findings have implications for future formative exercises and the formal summative examination process.

The sim must go on: adapting resident education to the COVID-19 pandemic using telesimulation.

The COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing rules necessitated the suspension of all in-person learning activities at our institution. Consequently, distance learning became essential. We adapted a high-fidelity immersive case-based simulation scenario for telesimulation by using the virtual meeting platform Zoom® to meet our curricular needs. The use of telesimulation to teach a complex case-based scenario is novel. Two cohorts of anesthesiology residents participated 2 weeks apart. All learners were located at home. Four faculty members conducted the telesimulation from different locations within our simulation center in the roles of director, simulation operator, confederate anesthesiologist, and confederate surgeon. The anesthesiologist performed tasks as directed by learners. The scenario was divided into four scenes to permit reflection on interventions/actions by the participants based on the clinical events as the scenario progressed, to facilitate intermittent debriefing and learner engagement. All residents were given a medical knowledge pretest before the telesimulation and a posttest and learner satisfaction survey at the conclusion. The scenario was authentic and immersive, represented an actual case, and provided the opportunity to practice lessons that could be applied in the clinical setting. Participants rated telesimulation a reasonable substitution for in-person learning and expressed gratitude for continuation of their simulation-based education in this format during the pandemic. Participants in the second cohort reported feeling more engaged (p = 0.008) and stimulated to think critically (p = 0.003). Audio quality was the most frequently noted limitation. Fifty-three residents completed both pre- and posttests. The two cohorts did not differ in knowledge pretest scores (62% vs 60%, p = 0.80) or posttest scores (78% vs. 77%, p = 0.87). Overall, knowledge scores improved with the telesimulation intervention (pretest mean = 61% [SD = 14%]; posttest mean = 78% [SD = 12%]; t (41) = - 7.89, p < 0.001). Thus, using a Zoom format, we demonstrated the feasibility of adapting a complex case for telesimulation and effective knowledge gain. Furthermore, we improved our process in real time based on participant feedback. Participants were satisfied with their learning experience, suggesting that this format may be used in other distance learning situations.