Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Simulation in Medical Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rheumatology Teaching

  • 1509 Accesses

Abstract

Simulation is an interactive educational tool that is increasingly used in medical education, and there is mounting evidence to support its role in improving knowledge, behaviours, as well as skill outcomes. Simulation is not a technology but a technique, which aims at mimicking or magnifying a real experience that is performed under supervision and guidance from a professional educator in a fully interactive manner. Equipment and facilities often dominate the discussion when taking about simulation-based education; however, effective learning using simulation as a methodology usually involves facilitators as well as simulated patients. Using simulation to improve safety will require full integration of its applications into the routine structures and practices of healthcare. Various leading forces and enactment mechanisms are required to drive simulation forward. By itself, simulation does not guarantee learning, but within the proper environment, it is a tool of paramount importance for modern curricula oriented by the adult learning theory. The future of simulation in healthcare depends on the commitment and creativity of the healthcare simulation community to see that improved patient safety using this tool becomes a reality. This chapter will discuss the art and science of simulated learning, the simulation fidelity continuum (low to high, multimode) and how it can be tailored to the learner’s needs. It will also discuss using simulation for assessment, how to design an effective simulation-based medical education activity as well as approach to evaluation of a simulation learning activity. It will expand to include curriculum integration and simulated learning in rheumatology and then will conclude with future directions of simulation-based education.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Oxford English Dictionary. www.oed.com. Accessed 29 Mar 2018.

  2. Datta R, Upadhyay K, Jaideep C. Simulation and its role in medical education. Med J Armed Forces India. 2012;68(2):167–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Akaike M, Fukutomi M, Nagamune M, Fujimoto A, Tsuji A, Ishida K, et al. Simulation-based medical education in clinical skills laboratory. J Med Investig JMI. 2012;59(1–2):28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dieckmann P, Ringsed C. Pedagogy in simulation-based training in healthcare. Chapter (4). In: Forrest K, Mckimm J, Edgar S, editors. Essential simulation in clinical education. Wiley; 2013. pp. 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Abela JC. Adult learning theories and medical education: a review. Malta Med J. 2009;21(1):11–8.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kaufman DM. Applying educational theory in practice. BMJ Br Med J. 2003;326(7382):213–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dreyfus H, Dreyfus S. Mind over machine: the power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Vaihinger H. The philosophy of AS if. Abingdon: Routledge; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dieckman P. Simulation settings for learning in acute medical care. In: Dieckman P, editor. Using simulations for education, training and research. Lengerich: Pabst. p. 40–138.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Diekman P, Manser T, Wehner T, Rall M. Reality and fiction cues in medical patient simulation, an interview study with anesthesiologists. J Cogn Eng Decis Making. 2007;1:148–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tekian A, McGuire C, McGaghie W. Innovative simulations for assessing professional competence: from paper-and-pencil to virtual reality. University of Illinois at Chicago, Department of Medical Education; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Maran NJ, Glavin RJ. Low- to high-fidelity simulation – a continuum of medical education? Med Educ. 2003;37(Suppl. 1):22–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Norcini JJ, McKinley DW. Assessment methods in medical education. Teach Teach Educ. 2007;23(3):239–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kneebonee R, Kidd J, Nestel D, Asvall S, Paraskeva P, Darzi A. (2002)An innovative model for teaching and learning clinical procedures. Med Educ. 2002;36:628–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kneebone RL, Kidd J, Nestel D, Barnet A, Lo B, King R, Yang GZ, Brown R. Blurring the boundaries: scenario-based simulation in a clinical setting. Med Educ. 2005;39:580–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kneebone R. Simulation and transformational change: the paradox of expertise. Acad Med. 2009;84:954–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Matsumoto ED, Hamstra SJ, Radomski SB, Cusimano MD. The effect of bench model fidelity on endourological skills: a randomized controlled study. J Urol. 2002;167(3):1243–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee KHK, Grantham H, Boyd R. Comparison of high- and low-fidelity mannequins for clinical performance assessment. Emerg Med Australas. 2008;20(6):508–14.

    Google Scholar 

  19. De Giovanni D, Roberts T, Norman G. Relative effectiveness of high- versus low-fidelity simulation in learning heart sounds. Med Educ. 2009;43(7):661–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Scerbo MWP, Schmidt EAM, Bliss JPP. Comparison of a virtual reality simulator and simulated limbs for phlebotomy training. J Infus Nurs. 2006;29(4):214–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Crofts JF, Bartlett C, Ellis D, Hunt LP, Fox R, Draycott TJ. Training for shoulder dystocia: a trial of simulation using low-fidelity and high-fidelity mannequins. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(6):1477–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Grady J, Kehrer R, Trusty C, Entin E, Entin E, Brunye T. Learning nursing procedures: the influence of simulator fidelity and student gender on teaching effectiveness. J Nurs Educ. 2008;47(9):403–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rodgers DLE, Securro SJE, Pauley RDE. The effect of high-fidelity simulation on educational outcomes in an advanced cardiovascular life support course. Simul Healthc E J Soc Simul Healthc Winter. 2009;4(4):200–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Munshi F, Lababidi H, Alyousef S. Low- versus high-fidelity simulations in teaching and assessing clinical skills. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2015;10(1):12–5.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smallman HS, John MS. Naive realism: misplaced faith in realistic displays. Ergon Des Q Hum Factors Appl. 2005;13(3):6–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Issenberg B, 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. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10e28.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rudolph JWP, Simon RE, Raemer DBP. Which reality matters? Questions on the path to high engagement in healthcare simulation. Simul Healthc E J Soc Simul Healthc Fall. 2007;2(3):161e163.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Aggarwal R, Mytton OT, Derbrew M, Hananel D, Heydenburg M, Issenberg B, MacAulay C, Mancini ME. Training and simulation for patient safety. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19(Suppl 2):i34–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Grober ED, Hamstra SJ, Wanzel KR, Reznick RK, Matsumoto ED, Sidhu RS, et al. The educational impact of bench model fidelity on the acquisition of technical skill: the use of clinically relevant outcome measures. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):374–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Steigerwald SN, Park J, Hardy KM, Gillman LM, Vergis AS. Does laparoscopic simulation predict intraoperative performance? A comparison between the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery and LapVR evaluation metrics. Am J Surg. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.08.031. pii: S0002-9610(14)00526-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tan SC, Marlow N, Field J, Altree M, Babidge W, Hewett P, Maddern GJ. A randomized crossover trial examining lowversus high-fidelity simulation in basic laparoscopic skills training. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(11):3207e3214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2326-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Curran V, Fleet L, White S, Bessell C, Deshpandey A, Drover A, Hayward M, Valcour J. A randomized controlled study of manikin simulator fidelity on neonatal resuscitation program learning outcomes. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2015;20(1):205–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Merchant DC. Does high-fidelity simulation improve clinical outcomes? J Nurses Staff Dev. 2012;28(1):E1–8. [quiz E9–10]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation based medical education research: 2003–2009. Med Educ. 2010;44:50–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Vaughan V III. The patient management problem as an evaluative instrument. Pediatr Rev. 1979;1(3):67–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. J Am Med Assoc. 2002;287(2):226–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. High-stakes test. Education reform. https://www.edglossary.org/high-stakes-testing/. Accessed on 30th Mar 2018.

  38. Gale T, Roberts M. Assessment. Chapter 5. In: Forrest K, Mckimm J, Edgar S, editors. Essential simulation in clinical education. Willey; 2013. pp. 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP. The use of clinical simulations in assessment. Med Educ. 2003;37(Suppl. 1):65–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ker J, Bradley P. Simulation in medical education. Edinburgh: Association for the Study of Medical Education; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Smith AF, Greaves JD. Beyond competence: defining and promoting excellence in anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:184–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Postgraduate Medical education and training board. Developing and maintain an assessment system – a PMETB guide to good practice. London: PMETB; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Epstein RM. Assessment in medical education. NEJM. 2007;356:387–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Gaba D. The future vision of simulation in health care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13(Suppl 1):i2–i10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Weller JM, Bloch M, Young S. Evaluation of high fidelity patient simulator in assessment of performance of anaesthetics. Br J Anaesthesia. 2003;90:43–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Johnson KB, Syroid ND, Drews FA. Part task and variable priority training in first-year anaesthesia resident education: a combined didactic and simulation-based approach to improve management of adverse airway and respiratory events. Anesthesiology. 2008;108:831–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Baxendale B, Coffey F, Buttery A. The roles of faculty and simulated patients in simulation. Chapter 6. In: Forrest K, Mckimm J, Edgar S, editors. Essential simulation in clinical education. Willey; 2013. pp. 87–110.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Barrows H. An overview of the uses of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skill. Acad Med. 1993;68:443–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Ziv A, Small SD, Wolpe PR. Patient safety and simulation-based medical education. Med Teach. 2000;22(5):489–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, Glick S. Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Acad Med. 2003;78:783–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Pazin Filho A, Romano MMD. Simulacao: aspectos conceituais. Rev Fac Med Ribeirao Preto. 2007;40(2):167–70.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Jones F, Passos-Neto CE, Braghiroli OF. Simulation in medical education: brief history and methodology. Princ Pract Clin Res. 2015;2(1):56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Decker S. Integrating guided reflection into simulated learning experiences. In: Jeffries PR, editor. Simulation in nursing: from conceptualization to evolution. New York: National League for Nursing; 2007. p. 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Dismukes RK, Gaba DM, Howard SK. So many roads: facilitated debriefing in healthcare. Simul Healthc. 2006;1(1):23–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Fanning R, Gaba D. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Soc Simul Healthc. 2007;2(2):115–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Dufresne RL, Raemer DB. There’s no such thing as “non-judgmental” debriefing: a theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simul Healthc. 2006;I(I):49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Cho SJ. Debriefing in pediatrics. Korean J Pediatr. 2015;58(2):47–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Couper K, Perkins GD. Debriefing after resuscitation. Curr Opin Crit Care [Internet]. 2013;19(3):188–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Clay AS, Que L, Petrusa ER, Sebastian M, Govert J. Debriefing in the intensive care unit: a feedback tool to facilitate bedside teaching. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(3):738–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Norman G, Muzzin L, Williams R, Swanson D. Simulation in health sciences education. J Instr Dev. 1985;8(1):11–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Miller R. Psychological considerations in the design of training equipment. Report no. WADC-TR-54-563, AD 71202. Wright Patterson Air Force BAse, OH; Wright Air Development Center. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base; 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Yachemetz T, Matthews LR. Clinical simulation terminology within the context of respiratory therapy education: a discussion paper. Can J Respir Ther. 2008;44(4):29.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Ebel R, Frisbie D. Essentials of educational measurement. 5th ed. Englewood: Prentice Hall College Div; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Teodor PG, Vanessa NP. Simulation in surgical education. Can Med Assoc J. 2010;182(11):1191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Bates R. A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Eval Program Plann. 2004;27(3):341–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Kyle RR, Murray WB. Clinical simulation: operations, engineering, and management. Burlington: Academic; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Issenberg SB. The scope of simulation-based health care education. Simul Healthc. 2006;1:203–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Issenberg SB, Mcgaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Gordon DJ, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27:10–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Motola I, Devine LA, Chung HS, Sullivan JE, Barry Issenberg S. Simulation in healthcare education: a best evidence practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 82. Med Teach. 2013;35(10):e1511–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Monrad SU, Zeller JL, Craig CL, DiPonio LA. Musculoskeletal education in US medical schools: lessons from the past and suggestions for the future. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2011;4:91–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Sabanathan A, Fent G, Purva M. OP0279 developing and running a rheumatology emergency simulation course. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:163–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Sabanathan A, Purva M, Helliwell P, Thurairajah T, Fernando X, Prakash A. Can you simulate gout teaching? Rheumatology. 2015;54(suppl 1):i147.

    Google Scholar 

  74. El Miedany Y, El Gaafary M, Youssef S, Almedany S, Palmer D. Using simulation in clinical education: psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) score assessment. Curr Rheumatol Rev. 2016;12(3):195–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Russell A, Beresniak A, Bessette L, et al. Cost-effectiveness modeling of abatacept versus other biologic agents in dmards and anti-tnf inadequate responders for the management of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2009;28:403–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Saraux A, Gossec L, Goupille P, et al. Cost-effectiveness modelling of biological treatment sequences in moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis in France. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49:733–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Cimmino MA, Leardini G, Salaffi F, et al. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of biologic agents for the management of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in anti-TNF inadequate responders in Italy: a modelling approach. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2011;29:633–41.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Beresniak A, Ariza-Ariza R, Garciallorente JF, Ramirez-Arellano A, Dupont D. Modelling cost-effectiveness of biologic treatments based on disease activity scores for the management of rheumatoid arthritis in Spain. Int J Inflamm. 2011;2011:727634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Puolakka K, Blåfield H, Kauppi M, et al. Cost-effectiveness modelling of sequential biologic strategies for the treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis in Finland. Open Rheumatol J. 2012;6:38–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. El Miedany Y, El Gaafary M, Youssef S, et al. OP0312 simulated teaching in rheumatology: assessment of an interactive e-learning postgraduate rheumatology teaching module. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Joorabchi B, Devries JM. Evaluation of clinical competence: the gap between expectation and performance. Pediatrics. 1996;97:179–84.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Mangione S, Nieman LZ. Cardiac auscultatory skills of internal medicine and family practice trainees. A comparison of diagnostic proficiency. JAMA. 1997;278:717–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Lypson ML, Frohna JG, Gruppen LD, Woolliscroft JO. Assessing residents’ competencies at baseline: identifying the gaps. Acad Med. 2004;79:564–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Friedman Z, Siddiqui N, Katznelson R, Devito I, Davies S. Experience is not enough: repeated breaches in epidural anesthesia aseptic technique by novice operators despite improved skill. Anesthesiology. 2008;108:914–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Bell RH Jr, Biester TW, Tabuenca A, Rhodes RS, Cofer JB, Britt LD, Lewis FR. Operative experience of residents in US general surgery programs: a gap between expectation and experience. Ann Surg. 2009;249:719–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Acad Med. 2011;86:706–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Birnbach DJ, Salas E. Can medical simulation and team training reduce errors in labor and delivery? Anesthesiol Clin. 2008;26:159–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Kuehster CR, Hall CD. Simulation: learning from mistakes while building communication and teamwork. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2010;26:123–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Salas E, Diazgranados D, Weaver SJ, King H. Does team training work? Principles for health care. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:1002–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. McGaghie WC, Draycott TJ, Dunn WF, Lopez CM, Stefanidis D. Evaluating the impact of simulation on translational patient outcomes. Simul Healthc. 2011a;6:S42–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Ziv A, Rubin O, Sidi A, Berkenstadt H. Credentialing and certifying with simulation. Anesthesiol Clin. 2007;25:261–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Steadman RH, Huang YM. Simulation for quality assurance in training, credentialing and maintenance of certification. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2012;26:3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Holmboe E, Rizzolo MA, Sachdeva AK, Rosenberg M, Ziv A. Simulation-based assessment and the regulation of healthcare professionals. Simul Healthc. 2011;6:S58–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Buyske J. The role of simulation in certification. Surg Clin N Am. 2010;90:619–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Ben-Menachem E, Ezri T, Ziv A, Sidi A, Brill S, Berkenstadt H. Objective structured clinical examination-based assessment of regional anesthesia skills: the Israeli National Board examination in anesthesiology experience. Anesth Analg. 2011;112:242–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Levine AI, Schwartz AD, Bryson EO, Demaria S Jr. Role of simulation in U.S. physician licensure and certification. Mt Sinai J Med. 2012;79:140–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Issenberg SB, Chung HS, Devine LA. Patient safety training simulations based on competency criteria of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Mt Sinai J Med. 2011a;78:842–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. McGaghie WC. Research opportunities in simulation-based medical education using deliberate practice. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:995–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. McGaghie WC. Medical education research as translational science. Sci Transl Med. 2010b;2:19cm8.1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. King’s College London, Darent Valley Hospital, Dartford, Kent, UK

    Yasser El Miedany

  2. Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

    Yasser El Miedany

Authors
  1. Yasser El Miedany
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

El Miedany, Y. (2019). Simulation in Medical Education. In: Rheumatology Teaching. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98213-7_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98213-7_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98212-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98213-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation