Simulation in perfusion: evaluating the efficacy of a specific training with eye-tracking

Adapting and applying student-centered learning in a perfusion clinical rotation

While the process of teaching student perfusionists has been in development since the 1950s, the publication of the processes to improve perfusion clinical education has been largely lacking. Publications regarding education from other allied health and medical fields have shown the value of student-centered learning. The use of reflective practice to move perfusion students from thinking about actions after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) to reflecting and reacting on actions during CPB is better encouraged by moving from a teacher-centered to a student-centered clinical model. Our institution's teaching process has developed into a multi-point procedure to make our students into reflective practicing clinicians. Student preceptor evaluations were reversed to allow the students to evaluate themselves first, with feedback from the preceptor given subsequently. Additionally, a biweekly student educational session, where the student chooses a topic and reviews current evidence-based practice, was instituted. The clinical program director serves as the moderator and clinical expert to facilitate problem-based learning during the sessions. Students were also given three skill/experience levels with goals to reach and move through during the rotation. These student levels were also helpful to our preceptors in knowing what each student's skill level was throughout their rotation. Overall, moving from a teacher-centered to a student-centered clinical rotation has helped make students familiar with reflective practice, self-evaluation, evidence-based practice, and problem-based learning. The incorporation of these processes will hopefully lead students to become lifelong reflective perfusionists.

Human Factors Evaluation of HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device Peripherals: An Eye Tracking Supported Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

Despite recent design improvements, human factors issues continue to challenge left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate user experience of former non-HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD patients post heart transplantation (HTX) and laypersons (LP) with HM3 LVAD peripherals in simulated everyday and emergency scenarios.

METHODS

This single center cohort study included untrained HTX and LP. Seven scenarios, including battery exchanges (without alarm, advisory alarm, dim light, consolidated bag), change of power supply, driveline dis-/reconnection and controller exchange were simulated. Subjects' gaze behavior was recorded using eye tracking technology. Success rate, pump-off-time, duration to success (DTS), percental fixation duration per areas of interest and post-scenario-survey results were defined as outcome measures.

RESULTS

Thirty subjects completed 210 scenarios, initially solving 82.4% (HTX vs. LP, p = 1.00). Changing power supply revealed highest complexity (DTS = 251 ± 93s, p = 0.76): 26.7% succeeded at first attempt (p = 0.68), 56.7% at second attempt, with significantly more LP failing (p = 0.04), resulting in 10 hazards from driveline disconnections (pump-off-time 2-118s, p = 0.25). Comparison on initial success showed differences in fixation durations for seven areas of interest (p < 0.037). Decreasing DTS during battery exchanges (p < 0.001) indicate high learnability. Exchanging batteries within the bag took longer (median DTS = 75.0 (IQR = 45.0)s, p = 0.09), especially in elderly subjects (r = 0.61, p < 0.001). Subjects with less initial success were more afraid of making mistakes (p = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

This eye tracking based human factors study provided insights into user experiences in handling HM3 peripherals. It highlights unintuitive and hazardous characteristics, providing guidance for future user-centered design of LVAD wearables.

Comparison of a perfusion simulator to a clinical operating room: evaluation of eye tracking data and subjective perception. A pilot study

Background:

With the aim of evaluating the perfusion simulator at the German Heart Center Berlin, similarity between simulation and clinical operation room (OR) was investigated regarding subjective perception and eye movement.

Methods:

Eight perfusionists performed an operation on the heart-lung machine (HLM) wearing eye tracking glasses, each in real OR and simulator. The three most important phases for perfusionists (going on bypass, cardioplegia administration and coming off bypass) were considered. Additional to eye tracking data as objective measure, questionnaires were completed, and interviews conducted afterwards.

Results:

The structure of simulator and real OR is perceived as basically the same. Yet there are differences in the HLM-models used and the temporal sequence. Different perception of both situations is reported in interviews and reflected in significant differences in the rating scales (NASA-TLX) on three of six subscales. In eye tracking data, certain AOIs could be identified for the individual phases, both in OR and simulator—an indication of fundamental similarity. However, differences regarding the proportions of the individual AOIs, especially in the first and third phase, are leading to the assumption that the simulator, and especially the simulation process, is only valid to a limited extent regarding subjective perception and eye tracking data.

Conclusion:

The use of the simulator for (advanced) training is accepted and explicitly requested by perfusionists. Yet further research is needed to identify the decisive factors (like simulation duration or additional tasks) for a valid execution in the simulator. Furthermore, a larger sample size should be regarded to allow statistical analysis.

Simulation-based training of critical events during cardiopulmonary bypass: importance of a critical events checklist

Objectives:

Evaluation of critical events training for clinical perfusionists is necessary to improve this educational approach. Critical events checklists are effective in reducing clinical complications, but should be tested in a simulation environment first. Individual behavior and stress response of clinical perfusionists during simulated critical events on cardiopulmonary bypass have not been evaluated yet. This study focuses on the evaluation of critical events training and critical events checklists in simulated cardiopulmonary bypass.

Methods:

A total of 19 clinical perfusionists from a single hospital took part in two simulated critical event scenarios. Clinical perfusionist behavior and physiological responses were recorded using eye tracking, heart rate variability, video, and audio. In addition, workloads were determined and participants were interviewed.

Results:

Relevant areas of interest were identified for each simulation phase. During critical event detection and subsequent decision-making, areas of interest hits and fixation durations varied with the use of a critical events checklist. Times to decision were shorter, decision quality was higher, and temporal workload was increased when the checklist was used. Evaluation of selected heart rate variability measures revealed a good correlation with pupil diameters.

Conclusion:

Evaluation of critical events during simulated cardiopulmonary bypass shows that the scenario is realistic and relevant for clinical practice. Integrating a critical events checklist improves the probability of correct decision-making and shortens the correct decision time. Temporal workload is increased when using a checklist. Eye tracking and heart rate variability are well suited to evaluate participants’ behaviors and stress levels. All participants welcomed simulation training for critical incidents.