Abstract
Abstract
Background
The study aimed to assess the impact of different training modalities on otoscopy performance during a practical exam using a high-fidelity simulator and to determine if objective evaluation of otoscopy is feasible using a simulator that records insertion depth and tympanic membrane coverage.
Methods
Participants were assigned to one of four groups: control and three intervention groups with varying training approaches. Participants received otoscopy training and then were assessed through a practical exam on a high-fidelity simulator that uses virtual reality to visualize the ear canal and middle ear. Performance was evaluated using a modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills checklist and Integrated Procedural Performance Instrument checklist. Insertion depth, tympanic membrane coverage, and correct diagnosis were recorded. Data were tested for normal distribution using the Shapiro-Wilk test. One-way ANOVA and, for non-normally distributed data, Kruskal-Wallis test combined with Dunn’s test for multiple comparisons were used. Interrater reliability was assessed using Cohen’s κ and Intraclass correlation coefficient.
Results
All groups rated their training sessions positively. Performance on the OSATS checklist was similar among groups. IPPI scores indicated comparable patient handling skills. The feedback group examined larger tympanic membrane areas and had higher rates of correct diagnosis. The correct insertion depth was rarely achieved by all participants. Interrater reliability for OSATS was strong. IPPI reliability showed good correlation.
Conclusion
Regardless of training modality, participants perceived learning improvement and skill acquisition. Feedback improved examination performance, indicating simulator-guided training enhances skills. High-fidelity simulator usage in exams provides an objective assessment of performance.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Tübingen
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference26 articles.
1. Vos T, Flaxman AD, Naghavi M, Lozano R, Michaud C, Ezzati M, Shibuya K, Salomon JA, Abdalla S, Aboyans V, et al. Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2163–96.
2. Rovers MM, Schilder AG, Zielhuis GA, Rosenfeld RM. Otitis media. Lancet. 2004;363(9407):465–73.
3. Ishman SL, Stewart CM, Senser E, Stewart RW, Stanley J, Stierer KD, Benke JR, Kern DE. Qualitative synthesis and systematic review of otolaryngology in undergraduate medical education. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(12):2695–708.
4. Fisher EW, Pfleiderer AG. Assessment of the otoscopic skills of general practitioners and medical students: is there room for improvement? Br J Gen Pract. 1992;42(355):65–7.
5. Pichichero ME, Poole MD. Assessing diagnostic accuracy and tympanocentesis skills in the management of otitis media. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155(10):1137–42.