Flipped Classroom: Improved team performance during resuscitation training through interactive pre-course content - a cluster-randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitation is a team effort, and it is increasingly acknowledged that team cooperation requires training. Staff shortages in many healthcare systems worldwide, as well as recent pandemic restrictions, limit opportunities for collaborative team training. To address this challenge, a learner-centred approach known as flipped learning has been successfully implemented. This model comprises self-directed, asynchronous pre-course learning, followed by knowledge application and skill training during in-class sessions. The existing evidence supports the effectiveness of this approach for the acquisition of cognitive skills, but it is uncertain whether the flipped classroom model is suitable for the acquisition of team skills. The objective of this study was to determine if a flipped classroom approach, with an online workshop prior to an instructor-led course could improve team performance and key resuscitation variables during classroom training. METHODS: A single-centre, cluster-randomised, rater-blinded study was conducted on 114 final year medical students at a University Hospital in Germany. The study randomly assigned students to either the intervention or control group using a computer script. Each team, regardless of group, performed two advanced life support (ALS) scenarios on a simulator. The two groups differed in the order in which they completed the flipped e-learning curriculum. The intervention group started with the e-learning component, and the control group started with an ALS scenario. Simulators were used for recording and analysing resuscitation performance indicators, while professionals assessed team performance as a primary outcome. RESULTS: The analysis was conducted on the data of 96 participants in 21 teams, comprising of 11 intervention groups and 10 control groups. The intervention teams achieved higher team performance ratings during the first scenario compared to the control teams (Estimated marginal mean of global rating: 7.5 vs 5.6, p < 0.01; performance score: 4.4 vs 3.8, p < 0.05; global score: 4.4 vs 3.7, p < 0.001). However, these differences were not observed in the second scenario, where both study groups had used the e-learning tool. CONCLUSION: Flipped classroom approaches using learner-paced e-learning prior to hands-on training can improve team performance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register ( https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00013096 ).

Medical imaging training with eye movement modeling examples: A randomized controlled study.

PURPOSE: To determine whether ultrasound training in which the expert's eye movements are superimposed to the underlying ultrasound video (eye movement modeling examples; EMMEs) leads to better learner outcomes than traditional eye movement-free instructions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 106 undergraduate medical students were randomized in two groups; 51 students in the EMME group watched 5-min ultrasound examination videos combined with the eye movements of an expert performing the task. The identical videos without the eye movements were shown to 55 students in the control group. Performance and behavioral parameters were compared prepost interventional using ANOVAs. Additionally, cognitive load, and prior knowledge in anatomy were surveyed. RESULTS: After training, the EMME group identified more sonoanatomical structures correctly, and completed the tasks faster than the control group. This effect was partly mediated by a reduction of extraneous cognitive load. Participants with greater prior anatomical knowledge benefited the most from the EMME training. CONCLUSION: Displaying experts' eye movements in medical imaging training appears to be an effective way to foster medical interpretation skills of undergraduate medical students. One underlying mechanism might be that practicing with eye movements reduces cognitive load and helps learners activate their prior knowledge.

High-fidelity is not superior to low-fidelity simulation but leads to overconfidence in medical students.

BACKGROUND: Simulation has become integral to the training of both undergraduate medical students and medical professionals. Due to the increasing degree of realism and range of features, the latest mannequins are referred to as high-fidelity simulators. Whether increased realism leads to a general improvement in trainees' outcomes is currently controversial and there are few data on the effects of these simulators on participants' personal confidence and self-assessment. METHODS: One-hundred-and-thirty-five fourth-year medical students were randomly allocated to participate in either a high- or a low-fidelity simulated Advanced Life Support training session. Theoretical knowledge and self-assessment pre- and post-tests were completed. Students' performance in simulated scenarios was recorded and rated by experts. RESULTS: Participants in both groups showed a significant improvement in theoretical knowledge in the post-test as compared to the pre-test, without significant intergroup differences. Performance, as assessed by video analysis, was comparable between groups, but, unexpectedly, the low-fidelity group had significantly better results in several sub-items. Irrespective of the findings, participants of the high-fidelity group considered themselves to be advantaged, solely based on their group allocation, compared with those in the low-fidelity group, at both pre- and post-self-assessments. Self-rated confidence regarding their individual performance was also significantly overrated. CONCLUSION: The use of high-fidelity simulation led to equal or even worse performance and growth in knowledge as compared to low-fidelity simulation, while also inducing undesirable effects such as overconfidence. Hence, in this study, it was not beneficial compared to low-fidelity, but rather proved to be an adverse learning tool.

Availability of cookies during an academic course session affects evaluation of teaching.

OBJECTIVES: Results from end-of-course student evaluations of teaching (SETs) are taken seriously by faculties and form part of a decision base for the recruitment of academic staff, the distribution of funds and changes to curricula. However, there is some doubt as to whether these evaluation instruments accurately measure the quality of course content, teaching and knowledge transfer. We investigated whether the provision of chocolate cookies as a content-unrelated intervention influences SET results. METHODS: We performed a randomised controlled trial in the setting of a curricular emergency medicine course. Participants were 118 third-year medical students. Participants were randomly allocated into 20 groups, 10 of which had free access to 500 g of chocolate cookies during an emergency medicine course session (cookie group) and 10 of which did not (control group). All groups were taught by the same teachers. Educational content and course material were the same for both groups. After the course, all students were asked to complete a 38-question evaluation form. RESULTS: A total of 112 students completed the evaluation form. The cookie group evaluated teachers significantly better than the control group (113.4 ± 4.9 versus 109.2 ± 7.3; p = 0.001, effect size 0.68). Course material was considered better (10.1 ± 2.3 versus 8.4 ± 2.8; p = 0.001, effect size 0.66) and summation scores evaluating the course overall were significantly higher (224.5 ± 12.5 versus 217.2 ± 16.1; p = 0.008, effect size 0.51) in the cookie group. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of chocolate cookies had a significant effect on course evaluation. These findings question the validity of SETs and their use in making widespread decisions within a faculty.