Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
×
Español (España) | English
Editorial
Home
Indexing
Original

Developing clinical decision making in stroke through virtual online simulation: automated asynchronous or instructor-led synchronous feedback? A randomized controlled trial

By
Valentina Fuentes Lombardo ,
Valentina Fuentes Lombardo

Medical School, Faculty of Medicine “Clínica Alemana”. Universidad del Desarrollo. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Javier Palominos Salas ,
Javier Palominos Salas

Medical School, Faculty of Medicine “Clínica Alemana”. Universidad del Desarrollo. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
María A. Pettersen Correa ,
María A. Pettersen Correa

Medical School, Faculty of Medicine “Clínica Alemana”. Universidad del Desarrollo. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Patricio Caro Guerra ,
Patricio Caro Guerra

Neurology Department. Hospital Padre Hurtado. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Víctor Navia González ,
Víctor Navia González

Medical School, Faculty of Medicine “Clínica Alemana”. Universidad del Desarrollo. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Arnold Hoppe ,
Arnold Hoppe

Medical School, Faculty of Medicine “Clínica Alemana”. Universidad del Desarrollo. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Soledad Armijo-Rivera ,
Soledad Armijo-Rivera

Medical School, Faculty of Medicine “Clínica Alemana”. Universidad del Desarrollo. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Felipe Machuca-Contreras ,
Felipe Machuca-Contreras

Universidad Autónoma de Chile. Santiago, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar

Abstract

Aim: to determine whether asynchronous virtual simulation with automatic feedback enhances learning about clinical decision-making in stroke compared with synchronous simulation with instructor-guided feedback in 4th-year medical students. We hypothesize that instructor-guided feedback drives better learning than automatic feedback.
Methodology: a quantitative randomized controlled parallel study was designed using the CONSORT extension to simulation studies. Twenty 4th year undergraduate medical students were divided into two groups. One group performed virtual simulations with instructor-guided feedback, and the other worked autonomously with automatic feedback. We administered a knowledge score test survey before and after applying the intervention bundle and a usefulness perception survey. Two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare changes in performance.
Results: the results of the two-way ANOVA on the performance level showed no significant changes between groups and between the first and third scenarios (p=0,428). Analysis of the simple main effect showed no significant difference between groups in the post-test (p =0,086) and no significant difference after the third scenario in the Synchronous (p = 0,001) and Asynchronous (p = 0,009) groups. The most remarkable improvement was the International Normalized Ratio that contraindicates thrombolysis (70 % improvement), followed by the first-line drug for hypertension and the platelet value that contraindicates thrombolysis (25 % improvement for both).

How to Cite

1.
Fuentes Lombardo V, Palominos Salas J, Pettersen Correa MA, Caro Guerra P, Navia González V, Hoppe A, Armijo-Rivera S, Machuca-Contreras F. Developing clinical decision making in stroke through virtual online simulation: automated asynchronous or instructor-led synchronous feedback? A randomized controlled trial. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias [Internet]. 2023 Oct. 4 [cited 2024 Jul. 1];2:428. Available from: https://conferencias.saludcyt.ar/index.php/sctconf/article/view/428

The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.