Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Sep 24;20(9):e261.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.9634.

Use of Simulator-Based Teaching to Improve Medical Students' Knowledge and Competencies: Randomized Controlled Trial

Quentin Fischer  1 , Yannis Sbissa  1 , Pascal Nhan  1 , Julien Adjedj  1 , Fabien Picard  1   2 , Alexandre Mignon  2   3   4 , Olivier Varenne  1   2   4
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Use of Simulator-Based Teaching to Improve Medical Students' Knowledge and Competencies: Randomized Controlled Trial

Quentin Fischer et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Simulator-based teaching for coronary angiography (CA) is an attractive educational tool for medical students to improve their knowledge and skills. Its pedagogical impact has not been fully evaluated yet.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare traditional face-to-face teaching with a simulator-based teaching for the acquisition of coronary anatomy knowledge and CAs interpretation.

Methods: A total of 118 medical school students in their fourth to sixth year were prospectively randomized in 2 groups: (1) a control teaching group (n=59, CONT group) and (2) a simulator group (using the Mentice VIST-Lab CA simulator; n=59, SIM group). The CONT group received a PowerPoint-based course, whereas the SIM group received a simulator-based course including the same information. After the course, all students were evaluated by 40 multiple choice questions (maximum of 100 points), including questions on coronary anatomy (part 1), angiographic projections (part 2), and real CAs interpretation (part 3). Satisfaction of the students was also evaluated by a simple questionnaire.

Results: Student characteristics were identical in both the groups: 62/118 (52.5%) were female and age was 22.6 (SD 1.4) years. Moreover, 35.6% (42/118) were in their fourth year, 35.6% (42/118) were in the fifth year, and 28.8% (34/118) in the sixth year. During the evaluation, SIM students had higher global scores compared with CONT students, irrespective of their year of medical school (59.5 [SD 10.8] points vs 43.7 [SD 11.3] points, P<.001). The same observations were noted for each part of the test (36.9 [SD 6.6] points vs 29.6 [SD 6.9] points, P<.001; 5.9 [SD 3.0] points vs 3.1 [SD 2.8] points, P<.001; and 16.8 [SD 6.9] points vs 10.9 [SD 6.5] points, P<.001; for parts 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Student satisfaction was higher in the SIM group compared with the CONT group (98% vs 75%, P<.001).

Conclusions: This study suggests that simulator-based teaching could potentially improve students' knowledge of coronary anatomy, angiography projections, and interpretation of real clinical cases, suggesting better clinical skills. These results should encourage further evaluation of simulator-based teaching in other medical specialties and how they can translate into clinical practice.

Keywords: coronary angiography; education; high fidelity simulation training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mentice VIST-Lab simulator used in the study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flowchart of study population.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Score according to group allocation at each part of the evaluation (simulant group [SIM] vs control group [CONT]). A) total score; B) coronary anatomy questions (part 1); C) angiographic projections (part 2); and D) real case interpretations (part 3). P value determined by Student t test.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Green SM, Klein AJ, Pancholy S, Rao SV, Steinberg D, Lipner R, Marshall J, Messenger JC. The current state of medical simulation in interventional cardiology: a clinical document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention's (SCAI) Simulation Committee. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Jan 1;83(1):37–46. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25048. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Figert PL, Park AE, Witzke DB, Schwartz RW. Transfer of training in acquiring laparoscopic skills. J Am Coll Surg. 2001 Nov;193(5):533–7. - PubMed
    1. Casey DB, Stewart D, Vidovich MI. Diagnostic coronary angiography: initial results of a simulation program. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016 Mar;17(2):102–5. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2015.12.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adams AJ, Wasson EA, Admire JR, Pablo GP, Babayeuski RA, Sako EY, Willis RE. A Comparison of teaching modalities and fidelity of simulation levels in teaching resuscitation scenarios. J Surg Educ. 2015;72(5):778–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.04.011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hauguel-Moreau M, Adjedj J. Managing pregnancy as an interventional cardiologist fellow-in-training: my experience with a simulator. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Dec 25;68(17):1916–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.09.002. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0735-1097(16)35240-8 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources