Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preclinical Simulation Training of Medical Students Results in Better Procedural Skills Performance in End of the Year Three Objective Structured Clinical Evaluation Assessments

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The Association of American Medical Colleges published guidelines for procedural skills to be included in medical school curricula; however, standardized training and objective assessments of procedural skills are limited. We implemented and evaluated a simulation-based mandatory procedural skills training program for preclinical medical students for nine procedures students were expected to gain proficiency before graduation.

Methods

Students received didactic and simulated practice sessions on task simulators for each selected procedure. After completion of their primary clinical year of training, as part of the end of the year three clinical performance examination, students were tested using an objective structured clinical evaluation (OSCE) format on two of the skills taught in their procedural skills classes.

Results

We report our educational experiences and the results of OSCE performance of five cohorts (n = 529) of trained students using simulations compared to a historical class cohort who were informally taught procedural skills at the patients’ bedside (n = 96). Tested at least a year after completion of standardized skills training, all five cohorts of simulation-trained students obtained better performance scores on their intravenous insertion skills compared to the bedside-trained group. For the Foley catheter insertion skills, however, only two of the simulation-trained cohorts performed significantly better than bedside-trained cohort.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that simulation-based procedural skills training can be effectively incorporated into preclinical medical school curricula with retention of skills in tested procedures at the end of the primary clinical year as assessed in an OSCE format.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Morris MC, Gallagher TK, Ridgway PF. Tools used to assess medical students competence in procedural skills at the end of a primary medical degree: a systematic review. Med Educ Online. 2012;17. doi: 10.3402/meo.v17i0.18398

  2. Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1316–26. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Promes SB, Chudgar SM, Grochowski CO, Shayne P, Isenhour J, Glickman SW, Cairns CB. Gaps in procedural experience and competency in medical school graduates. Academic emergency medicine: official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. 2009;16(Suppl 2):S58–62. doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00600.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen P (2014) Are med school grads prepared to practice medicine. Well, New York Times

  5. Hannon FB. A national medical education needs’ assessment of interns and the development of an intern education and training programme. Med Educ. 2000;34(4):275–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Boots RJ, Egerton W, McKeering H, Winter H. They just don’t get enough! Variable intern experience in bedside procedural skills. Intern Med J. 2009;39(4):222–7. doi:10.1111/j.1445-5994.2009.01699.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Learning objectives for medical student education—guidelines for medical schools: report I of the Medical School Objectives Project. Acad Med: J Assoc Am Med Coll. 1999;74 (1):13–8

  8. Colleges AoAM. Core entrustable professional activities for entering residency: curriculum developers’ guide. 2014.

  9. Lund F, Schultz JH, Maatouk I, Krautter M, Moltner A, Werner A, Weyrich P, Junger J, Nikendei C. Effectiveness of IV cannulation skills laboratory training and its transfer into clinical practice: a randomized, controlled trial. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e32831. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Medical teacher. 2005;27(1):10–28. doi:10.1080/01421590500046924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sarikaya O, Civaner M, Kalaca S. The anxieties of medical students related to clinical training. Int J Clin Pract. 2006;60(11):1414–8. doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.00869.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Radcliffe C, Lester H. Perceived stress during undergraduate medical training: a qualitative study. Med Educ. 2003;37(1):32–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bosse HM, Mohr J, Buss B, Krautter M, Weyrich P, Herzog W, Junger J, Nikendei C. The benefit of repetitive skills training and frequency of expert feedback in the early acquisition of procedural skills. BMC medical education. 2015;15:22. doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0286-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ziv A, Ben-David S, Ziv M. Simulation based medical education: an opportunity to learn from errors. Medical teacher. 2005;27(3):193–9. doi:10.1080/01421590500126718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Moss F, McManus IC. The anxieties of new clinical students. Med Educ. 1992;26(1):17–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Stewart RA, Hauge LS, Stewart RD, Rosen RL, Charnot-Katsikas A, Prinz RA. A CRASH course in procedural skills improves medical students’ self-assessment of proficiency, confidence, and anxiety. Am J Surg. 2007;193(6):771–3. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Liddell MJ, Davidson SK, Taub H, Whitecross LE. Evaluation of procedural skills training in an undergraduate curriculum. Med Educ. 2002;36(11):1035–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dayal AK, Fisher N, Magrane D, Goffman D, Bernstein PS, Katz NT. Simulation training improves medical students’ learning experiences when performing real vaginal deliveries. Simulation in healthcare: journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare. 2009;4(3):155–9. doi:10.1097/SIH.0b013e3181b3e4ab.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Santen SA, Hemphill RR, Spanier CM, Fletcher ND. ‘Sorry, it’s my first time!’ Will patients consent to medical students learning procedures? Med Educ. 2005;39(4):365–9. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02113.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Waters PS, McVeigh T, Kelly BD, Flaherty GT, Devitt D, Barry K, Kerin MJ. The acquisition and retention of urinary catheterisation skills using surgical simulator devices: teaching method or student traits. BMC medical education. 2014;14:264. doi:10.1186/s12909-014-0264-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Herrmann-Werner A, Nikendei C, Keifenheim K, Bosse HM, Lund F, Wagner R, Celebi N, Zipfel S, Weyrich P. “Best practice” skills lab training vs. a “see one, do one” approach in undergraduate medical education: an RCT on students’ long-term ability to perform procedural clinical skills. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e76354. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lenchus JD. End of the “see one, do one, teach one” era: the next generation of invasive bedside procedural instruction. The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association. 2010;110(6):340–6.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mileder L, Wegscheider T, Dimai HP. Teaching first-year medical students in basic clinical and procedural skills—a novel course concept at a medical school in Austria. GMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung. 2014;31(1):Doc6. doi:10.3205/zma000898.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sanders CW, Edwards JC, Burdenski TK. A survey of basic technical skills of medical students. Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2004;79(9):873–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Manthey D, Fitch M. Stages of competency for medical procedures. Clin Teach. 2012;9(5):317–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med. 1990;65(9):S63–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Glass CC, Acton RD, Blair PG, Campbell AR, Deutsch ES, Jones DB, Liscum KR, Sachdeva AK, Scott DJ, Yang SC. American College of Surgeons/Association for Surgical Education medical student simulation-based surgical skills curriculum needs assessment. Am J Surg. 2014;207(2):165–9. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.07.032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. ten Cate O. Entrustability of professional activities and competency-based training. Med Educ. 2005;39(12):1176–7. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02341.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Dr. Andrew Wackett for the curriculum support, Ms. Perrilynn Baldelli for the Clinical Skills Center support, and the teaching faculty of Stony Brook University Departments of Urology, Anesthesiology, and Orthopedics for training the students.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperativr Medicine, Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 11100 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, 44106, OH, USA

    Peggy A. Seidman

  2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Stony Brook University School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Lauren M. Maloney

  3. Undergraduate Medical Education, Stony Brook University School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Doreen M. Olvet & Latha Chandran

  4. Department of Pediatrics, Stony Brook University School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Latha Chandran

Authors
  1. Peggy A. Seidman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lauren M. Maloney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Doreen M. Olvet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Latha Chandran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peggy A. Seidman.

Ethics declarations

This study was approved by the Stony Brook University Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seidman, P.A., Maloney, L.M., Olvet, D.M. et al. Preclinical Simulation Training of Medical Students Results in Better Procedural Skills Performance in End of the Year Three Objective Structured Clinical Evaluation Assessments. Med.Sci.Educ. 27, 89–96 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-017-0371-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-017-0371-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation