Simulation Learning

[Emergencies-Infinite worlds? : Extended reality as a medium in the education, continuing and advanced training in emergency medicine]

BACKGROUND

Simulation training is indispensable in emergency medicine, especially for enhancing patient safety. Methods and technologies used include a wide spectrum ranging from simple skill trainers to complex full-scale simulated environments integrating standardized patient actors. Limitations include the simulation of dynamic changes of clinical symptoms, the depiction of emotions and patient movements as well as complex environments, such as lively traffic. Extended reality (XR) holds the potential to overcome these limitations.

METHODS/AIMS

Starting with the technological basis and the didactic considerations in the field of XR, the paper reflects the potentials and limitations of this new technology in the domain of medical simulation training. Further focus is put on the integration of XR into existing training curricula.

RESULTS

The XR covers various technologies, ranging from PC-based applications that are similar to conventional computer games, over virtual realities enabling spatially freely navigable 3‑dimensional simulation (using closed 3D glasses: head mounted displays, HMD), to mixed-reality applications that combine virtual elements and real physical objects; however, technology alone does not stimulate learning. As with other simulation methods, it is crucial with XR to implement learning objectives, methods and technologies in a suitable teaching-learning arrangement and to familiarize teachers and students with the new technology. Evidence in the literature with respect to learning success is limited by the heterogeneity of technologies, target groups, teaching-learning arrangements and learning outcomes. Overall, significant increases can be shown for the intrinsic motivation of learners, and for high emotional participation (measured as perceived presence in the virtual environment).

DISCUSSION

Technological developments and the increasing use of digital media in emergency medical education and training favor the leap from XR-based pure demonstration projects to educational practice. Decisive for the educational success are the clear orientation towards concrete learning goals and a thorough familiarization with the new technology.

CONCLUSION

Simulation training based on XR expands the spectrum of existing simulation methods to integrate new dimensions of learning objectives. Further research on the effectiveness of this method is needed.

Health Sciences Students’ Attitude, Perception, and Experience of Using Educational Simulation in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Simulation-based education (SBE) provides a safe, effective, and stimulating environment for training medical and healthcare students. This is especially valuable for skills that cannot be practiced on real patients due to ethical and practical reasons. We aimed to assess medical students’ attitude, perception, and experience of simulation-based medical education in Saudi Arabia. Method: A validated cross-sectional survey, using the KidSIM scale, was conducted to measure the level of perception and experience of students from different health sciences specialties toward integrating simulation as an educational tool. Participants responded to questions investigated the importance of simulation, opportunities for Inter-Professional Education (IPE), communication, roles and responsibilities, and situation awareness. Only students with previous experience of SBE were considered for participation. Result: This survey was completed by 246 participants, of whom 165 (67%) were male students and 228 (93%) were aged between the range of 18–30 years old. Of the respondents, 104 (67%) were respiratory care students, 90 (37%) were anesthesia technology students, and 45 (18%) were nursing students. Most of the participants had previous experience in IPE simulation activities (84%), and more than half of the students (54%) had a grade point average (GPA) ranging between 5.00 and 4.50. Overall, students had positive attitudes toward and beliefs about SBE, with a mean score of 129.76 ± 14.27, on the KidSIM scale, out of 150. Students’ GPA was significantly associated with a better perception to the relevance of simulation (p = 0.005), communication (p = 0.003), roles and responsibilities (p = 0.04), and situation awareness (p = 0.009). GPA is merely the sole predictor for positive attitude toward simulation with coefficient Beta value of 4.285 (p = 0.001). There were no significant correlations between other students’ characteristic variables (gender, specialty, study year, experience in IPE, and prior critical care experience). Conclusion: We found that health sciences students’ perception of SBE in Saudi Arabia is generally positive, and students’ performance is a significant determinant of the positive perception.

Social Perception of Systemic Risks

The article distinguishes between two types of risks: conventional and systemic risks. Conventional risks can be contained in space and time, follow linear cause-effect relationships and can be addressed with effective and pointed interventions into the cause-effect chain. Systemic risks, however, are characterized by high complexity, transboundary effects, stochastic relationships, nonlinear cause-effect patterns with tipping points, and are often associated with less public attention than they require. The article addresses the reasons why systemic risks seem to be attenuated in public perception. The article goes on to consider how the social amplification of risk framework is useful in the context of systemic risks and describes needed extensions of that framework. It identifies practical tools for assessing the significance of perceptions for systemic risk situations. Finally, it argues that a graphic representation and simulation of evolving systemic risks and potential countermeasures as well as a participatory deliberative approach of inclusive risk governance are suitable governance strategies for preventing, mitigating, or managing systemic risks.