ABSTRACT
One-and-a-half syndrome (OHS) is a horizontal gaze palsy in one direction with internuclear ophthalmoplegia (INO) in the other. The only eye movement possible is the abduction of the contralateral eye with nystagmus. The usual structures affected are the medial longitudinal fasciculus and paramedian pontine reticular formation or the abducens nucleus. Most commonly, the OHS is caused by ischemia and demyelinating lesions. The other causes include infectious, neoplastic, and rarely traumatic. We report a case of a 42-year-old non-compliant hypertensive female who presented with giddiness, projectile vomiting, and right-sided hemiparesis and was found to have OHS on cranial nerve examination in the emergency department (ED). In the ED, the presence of complete horizontal gaze palsy in one direction with INO in the other direction should raise suspicion of a brainstem pathology.
ABSTRACT
Making the simulated patient die is one of the controversial decisions in healthcare simulation. Some experts believe that we should never make the manikin die as they believe the facilitator is deceiving the learners, whereas other groups of experts believe that there are advantages in making the simulated patient die as it provides a valuable learning experience to the learners, and it is as close to reality as possible. Hence, we undertook this review to know whether simulated patient mortality benefits the learners. A systematic literature search was performed in Embase, Scopus, PubMed Central, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar. Randomized controlled trials assessing the learner's stress and knowledge retention when the simulated patient dies were eligible for inclusion. Comparative intervention effect estimates obtained from meta-analyses were represented as pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% CI. Six studies with 384 participants (learners) were eligible for the analysis. All the studies had some concerns when the risk of bias was assessed. In the simulated patient mortality group, the learners experienced higher stress as assessed compared to the group where the simulated patient survives. The two groups' pooled mean difference for anxiety and stress levels was 0.63 (0.17-1.09). Three out of five studies showed improved knowledge retention in the simulated mortality group, one showed no difference, and one showed decreased knowledge retention in the simulated mortality group. The stress response of learners when exposed to simulated mortality during a simulation session is higher than the simulated survival group. However, this increased stress response is processed by the students differently. Some students will thrive when increased stress is presented to them, while some students perceive it negatively. Thus, this increased stress response can lead to knowledge retention if the timing of the stress response happens mainly during debriefing for select students. The role of the facilitator is also important as skilled debriefers will be able to use this increased stress to their advantage to increase knowledge retention. Thus, simulated mortality can be used as an effective stressor for increasing knowledge retention during the debriefing phase for select students by a skilled debriefer. This study would aid the simulation policymakers, simulation faculties, and simulation researchers in the impact of simulated patient death and learners' stress response. If the simulation scenario is designed well with robust pre-briefing, this increased stress response can enhance learning and knowledge retention during debriefing.
ABSTRACT
Several debriefing models have been described in the literature. However, all these debriefing models are designed in the general medical education format. Hence, for people involved in patient care and clinical teaching, sometimes it may become tedious and difficult to incorporate these models. In the following article, we describe a simplified model for debriefing using the well-known mnemonic ABCDE. The ABCDE approach is expanded as follows: A - Avoid Shaming/Personal Opinions, B - Build a Rapport, C - Choose a Communication Approach, D - Develop a Debriefing Content, and E - Ensure the Ergonomics of Debriefing. The unique thing about this model is that it provides a debriefing approach as a whole rather than only the delivery. It deals with human factors, educational factors, and ergonomics of debriefing, unlike other debriefing models. This approach can be used for debriefing by simulation educators in the field of emergency medicine and also by educators in other specialties.
