Keywords
Simulation
Medical students
How to Cite
Copyright © | All rights reserved.
The journal holds the exclusive copyright for the publication of this article under the terms of Brazilian law 9610/98.
Partial reproduction
The use of parts of the texts, figures and questionnaire of the article is free, being mandatory the citation of the authors and journal.
Total reproduction
It is expressly prohibited and must be authorized by the journal.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the performance of students in cardiovascular assessment using a virtual patient compared to a standardized patient. Methods: Prospective, randomized study, conducted in a private medical institution, starting in August 2020 and ending in December 2020. Two scales created by the authors and validated by the authors' professors by consensus were used for evaluation. The metrics used are from exploratory descriptive analysis and classical measurement theory for the analysis of the scales. Results: Randomization was done by closed envelope, where 33 students (52.4%) for the virtual patient training and 30 students (47.6%) for the control group with standardized patient. After 3 months, the students performed an evaluation on the same clinical case. The diagnostic hypothesis item showed the greatest difference; with the virtual patient score of 53.3% compared to the control group score of 26.7%. This data corroborates what the literature mentions as the greatest gain in the use of this strategy. Conclusion: The virtual patient was used experimentally and during the pandemic by COVID-19. Virtual patients offer, opportunities for individualized feedback, revisit actions taken during interaction and allow comparison with best practice protocols.
References
ADEDOYIN OB e SOYKAN E. Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments. 2020; 31(2): 863-875.
ANNANSINGH F. Mind the gap: cognitive active learning in virtual learning environment perception of instructors and students. Education and Information Technologies. 2019; 24(6): 3669-3688.
ARMSTRONG EA e PARSA-PARSI R. How can physicians' learning styles drive educational planning? Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2005; 80(7): 680-684.
BRANDÃO CFS, et al. Centros de simulação e projeto pedagógico: dois lados da mesma moeda. Scientia Medica. 2018; 28(1): 28709.
BRUNO RR, et al. Virtual and augmented reality in critical care medicine: the patient's, clinician's, and researcher's perspective. Critical Care. London – England. 2022; 26(1): 326.
CENDAN J e LOK B. The use of virtual patients in medical school curricula. Advances in Physiology Education. 2012; 36(1): 48-53.
CHENG A, et al. A practical guide to virtual debriefings: communities of inquiry perspective. Advances in Simulation. 2020; 5: 18.
CURTEILLE O, et al. Interpersonal behaviors and socioemotional interaction of medical students in a virtual clinical encounter. BMC Medical Education. 2014; 14: 64.
DOURADO ASS e GIANNELLA TR. Ensino baseado em simulação na formação continuada de médicos: análise das percepções de alunos e professores de um Hospital do Rio de Janeiro. Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica. 2014; 38(4): 460-469.
EDELBRING S, et al. Experiencing virtual patients in clinical learning: a phenomenological study. Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice. 2011; 16(3): 331-345.
FORONDA CL, et al. Virtual simulation in nursing education: a systematic review spanning 1996 to 2018. Simulation in Healthcare. 2020; 15(1): 46-54.
GABA DM. The Future Vision of Simulation in Healthcare. Simulation in Healthcare. 2007; 2(2): 126-135.
GARCIA-BRAVO S, et al. Virtual reality and video games in cardiac rehabilitation programs. A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2021; 43(4): 448-457.
GAVGANI AM, et al. A comparative study of cybersickness during exposure to virtual reality and "classic" motion sickness: Are they different?. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2018; 125(6): 1670-1680.
GOSAI J, et al. Simulation in cardiology: state of the art. European Heart Journal. 2015; 36(13): 777-783.
HARLESS W, et al. CASE: a computer aided simulation of the clinical encounter. Journal of Medical Education. 1971; 46(5): 443-448.
HOELSCHER GL, et al. Virtual Healthcare Simulation: Implementation, Distractions, and Preferences. Simulation in Healthcare. 2022; 17(5): 322-328.
HUANG G, et al. Virtual patient simulation at US and Canadian medical schools. Academic medicine. 2007; 82(5): 446-451.
JUNG C, et al. Virtual and Augmented Reality in Cardiovascular Care: State-of-the-Art and Future Perspectives. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022; 15(3): 519-532.
KENNY NP e BEAGAN BL. The patient as text: a challenge for problem-based learning. Medical Education. 2004; 38(10): 1071-1079.
KNIGHT EP e Prettyman AV. Rural telehealth team education for baccalaureate and nurse practitioner students. The Journal of Nursing Education. 2020; 59(5): 274-277.
KOLB DA e FRY R. Toward an Applied Theory of Experiential Learning. COOPER C (Ed.). Theories of Group Process. London: Wile. 1975; 33-57.
KONONOWICZ A, et al. Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2019; 21(7): e14676.
KONONOWICZ AA, et al. Virtual patients-what are we talking about? A framework to classify the meanings of the term in healthcare education. BMC Medical Education. 2015; 15(1): 11.
O'REGAN S, et al. Observer roles that optimize learning in healthcare simulation education: a systematic review. Advances in Simulation. 2016; 1: 4.
POSEL N, et al. Twelve tips to support the development of clinical reasoning skills using virtual patient cases. Medical Teacher. 2015; 37(9): 813-8.
SCHIFFERDECKER KE, et al. Adoption of computer-assisted learning in medical education: the educators' perspective. Medical Education. 2012; 46(11): 1063-1073.
SCHNEIDER SL e COUNCIL ML. Distance learning in the era of COVID-19. Archives of Dermatological Research. 2021; 313(5): 389-390.
TURON M, et al. Feasibility and safety of virtual-reality–based early neurocognitive stimulation in critically ill patients. Annals of Intensive Care. 2017; 7(1): 81.
VOVK A, et al. Simulator sickness in augmented reality training using the Microsoft HoloLens. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Montreal – Canada. 2018; 3173574.3173783.