Health Care Simulation in Person and at a Distance: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Distance simulation is a method of health care training in which the learners and facilitators are in different physical locations. Although methods of distance simulation have existed in health care for decades, this approach to education became much more prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic review studies a subset of distance simulation that includes combined in-person and distance simulation elements, identified here as "mixed- distance simulation." A review of the distance simulation literature identified 10,929 articles. Screened by inclusion and exclusion criteria, 34 articles were ultimately included in this review. The findings of this review present positive and negative aspects of mixed-distance simulation formats, a description of the most frequent configurations related to delivery, terminology challenges, as well as future directions including the need for faculty development, methodological rigor, and reporting details.

Readmission and inhospital death 1 year after COVID-19 hospitalization in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Acute SARS-COVID-19 infection may increase readmission risk compared to other respiratory infections. We assessed the 1-year readmission and inhospital death rates of hospitalized SARS-COVID-19 patients compared to patients hospitalized with other types of pneumonia. METHODS: We determined the 1-year readmission and inhospital death rate of adult patients initially hospitalized with a positive SARS-COVID-19 result, and subsequently discharged, between March 2020 and August 2021, at a Netcare private hospital in South Africa, and compared this to all hospitalized adult pneumonia patients in the 3 years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (2017-2019). RESULTS: The 1-year readmission rate in COVID-19 patients was 6.6% (328/50,067) versus 8.5% in pneumonia patients (4699/55,439; p < 0.001), with an inhospital mortality rate of 7.7% (n = 251) and 9.7% (n = 454; p = 0.002) for COVID-19 and pneumonia patients, respectively.

Assessing Usability of Untethered Head-Mounted Displays for Medical Education: A Within-Person Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Recent meta-analyses have found immersive technology to be effective for training, yet there is limited research on user experience with head-mounted displays (HMDs) in the medical domain. If emerging immersive displays do not meet usability standards in the context of healthcare simulation, the technology may cause frustration or hinder learning outcomes. This is the first experimental comparison of usability in commercial untethered, "all-in-one" HMDs for healthcare simulation. METHODS: The usability and comfort of three commercial untethered HMDs (Oculus Go, Oculus Quest, and Lenovo Mirage Solo) were tested using a randomized within-person design such that each headset was evaluated by all participants in a random sequence. During the experiment, participants (n = 9) interacted with a simulated healthcare environment in each headset and then responded to usability and comfort surveys. RESULTS: All of the HMDs were rated as having higher than average usability compared with an industry benchmark scale, the System Usability Scale. Only one of the headsets had a usability rating in the highest range, which was significantly higher than the lowest rated headset ( P = 0.047, Cohen d = 0.901). In addition, feelings of discomfort with the headsets were low, and comfort ratings did not differ significantly between headsets ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Untethered HMDs had acceptable user experience ratings during a healthcare simulation task, but some headsets were rated higher on usability. Because usability is important for learner engagement and training outcomes, educators should confirm that immersive displays meet usability standards before implementation.

Direct percutaneous transhepatic portomesenteric venous stenting in management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Pancreatectomy with portal and/or superior mesenteric vein resection remains a controversial procedure because of high complexity and morbidity. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to increase resectability of these locally advanced lesions. We aimed to assess the utility and efficacy of direct percutaneous transhepatic portomesenteric venous stenting (THVS) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in increasing surgical resectability of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma. METHODS: Forty pancreatic carcinoma patients with tumor thrombus involving the portal vein and superior mesenteric vein were identified. Patients underwent THVS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Whipple procedure was offered to responders. RESULTS: THVS was attempted in all. The tumor thrombus could not be crossed in 2 patients (95% technical success rate). All patients underwent 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and capecitabine. Disease progression was noted in 16 patients and surgery was not offered. Twenty-two patients were explored with intent-to-perform a Whipple procedure. In 7 of these (32%), extensive disease precluding surgical resection was identified and the procedure was abandoned. Whipple procedure without vascular resection was performed successfully in 15 patients (68%). There were no perioperative deaths. Negative vascular margins were noted in 3 patients and negative peripancreatic lymph nodes in 5 patients. Median survival was 17 months (range, 5 to 70 mo). In the stented nonoperative group, median survival was 9 months (range, 3 to 19 mo). The stented and resected group achieved a statistically significant (P=0.0422) survival advantage. CONCLUSIONS: THVS in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy can increase tumor resectability and survival in a select group of locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients.