During the Segamed Congress in Nice on January 19th and 20th 2018, the researchers of ILumens and LATI of the Université Paris Descartes research laboratories presented one of their scientific articles from the MacCoy Critical research project. Medusims is participating in this French National Research Agency (ANR) project over 42 months to adapt its virtual […]
The example of the digital simulator on acute coronary syndrome
The training of health professionals by simulation is rapidly expanding in France. High-fidelity training with manikins necessitates considerable resources such as trainers, premises, acquisition and maintenance costs. Virtual simulation circumvents these limits and becomes an essential tool in the pedagogical courses in healthcare.
Following this logic, the first virtual simulator on acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was developed in 2013. And a study was conducted to assess the educational value of it and the interest for assessing skills, the results of which were presented during the 2014 edition of the Société Française d’Anesthésie et de Réanimation (French Society of Anaesthesia and Resuscitation) Congress.
Serious Game ACS
The Serious Game (SG) on acute coronary syndrome revisits two scenarios used with high-fidelity manikins: ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
Putting oneself in the place of an emergency doctor then a cardiologist, the user ensures the global management of the patient right up to the end of their hospital stay. Different pedagogical objectives are addressed – training oneself, assessment of one’s expertise and validation of one’s knowledge compared to the most recent European recommendations in the domain of ACS (diagnosis, examinations, prescriptions).
The two tools – SG and manikin – are studied by 24 students who are split up randomly into two groups. Each group responded to a skills test (MCQ) before the simulation session. A score is established at the end of each session: automatically for the SG and by two assessors for the manikin. Then, the satisfaction of users was assessed with questionnaires: ease of use, engagement, immersiveness, the urge to reuse it and the accuracy of the score given.
The tools obtain good results in engagement, the urge to reuse it and immersiveness, without any significant difference between the two. The concordance of scores is excellent in the two platforms with very good acceptance from users. Furthermore, the SG obtained the best assessment for ease of use.
The two platforms allow a correct assessment of users. The manikin-based simulation assessed more effectively the non-technical skills but necessitates more resources and time. Whereas the SG allows an assessment in real time, unlike the manikin. Studies are ongoing to improve the assessments and comparisons of the value of learning.