Key result
Simulator-based blood pressure training resulted in lower accuracy for systolic blood pressure measurement compared to conventional training on colleagues.
Why the study?
Simulators are used to train competencies such as blood pressure measurement, but whether this training translates to real-life competency remains unclear.
Does training on a blood pressure simulator improve the accuracy of blood pressure measurement in first-year medical students compared to conventional training on colleagues?
RCT (n=145)
Does training on a blood pressure simulator improve the accuracy of blood pressure measurement in first-year medical students compared to conventional training on colleagues?
Simulator-based training for blood pressure measurement was less effective than conventional training on human volunteers for achieving accuracy in real-life settings.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Simulator training reduces BP measurement accuracy versus conventional methods; challenges simulation as equivalent for foundational clinical skills.
INTRODUCTION: Simulators are used for training competencies including blood pressure (BP) measurement. Whether such training translates to competency in real life is unclear. METHODS: We randomized 145 first-year undergraduate medical students to train on a BP simulator or arms of colleagues. After training, all students were assessed for accuracy (within 4 mm Hg above or below assessor's simultaneous recording) and methodology of BP recordings by an objectively structured clinical examination on real patients. RESULTS: Overall, 67 (46.2%) and 92 (63.4%) students accurately measured systolic and diastolic BP, respectively. Forty-three (58.1%) of 74 students in the conventional training recorded systolic BP accurately compared with 24 (33.8%) of 71 students in simulator training (P = 0.005). Diastolic BP was accurately recorded by 56 (75.7%) of 74 students in conventional group as against 36 (50.7%) of 71 students trained on simulator (P = 0.002). Median (interquartile range) objectively structured clinical examination score in conventional group was 8 (7-9) compared with 6 (5-7) in simulator group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Simulator-based training did not translate to clinical competence in terms of accuracy and methodology of BP recordings in real-life settings. Notwithstanding its advantages, simulator-based BP training needs integration with human element to make it meaningful and relevant to clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Basheer et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in First-year undergraduate medical students (n=145). Simulator-based blood pressure training vs. Conventional training on arms of colleagues was evaluated on Accuracy of systolic blood pressure measurement (p=0.005). Simulator-based blood pressure training resulted in lower accuracy for systolic blood pressure measurement compared to conventional training on colleagues.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: