+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparing the standardized live trauma patient and the mechanical simulator models in the ATLS initial assessment station



Comparing the standardized live trauma patient and the mechanical simulator models in the ATLS initial assessment station



Journal of Surgical Research 162(1): 7-10



Mechanical simulators may be an acceptable substitute for the live patient model in trauma skills teaching and assessment. We compare these models in the initial assessment station of the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) course. After a pilot project utilizing both models in a provider ATLS course it appeared that the mechanical model would be satisfactory for ATLS teaching and assessment. Instructors (n = 32) and ATLS Students (n = 64) were randomly selected from our database and completed a questionnaire evaluating the patient model and the simulator after viewing a video in which the simulator replaced the patient model. The evaluators indicated whether the patient and simulator models were satisfactory and then compared them by indicating whether there was any difference between the models, indicating which was more challenging, interesting, dynamic, enjoyable, realistic, and better overall. Comments were also written in the evaluation form. All 32 instructors and 64 students indicated that both the patient and simulator models were satisfactory for teaching and testing ATLS resuscitation skills. At least 62 of the 64 students rated the simulator higher in all categories. Two students rated the patient model as more realistic and two noted no difference in terms of being more interesting. All 32 instructors indicated that the simulator was more challenging, interesting, dynamic, and better overall. Two of the 32 instructors indicated that the patient model was more enjoyable and two indicated that there was no difference as far as the models being realistic. Comments included inability to hear breath sounds that were changing in the patient model as opposed to the simulator model, and the simulator was more interesting and dynamic because the hemodynamic and physiologic parameters could be witnessed without being prompted by the instructor. One main concern expressed by the participants was the more costly simulator, and two instructors indicated that the scenarios could be improved to fit the superior capabilities of the simulator. There was strong support from both students and instructors for the use of the simulator as a satisfactory substitute for the live patient model. The cost of the simulator is considered a significant issue. However, in centers where simulators are readily available, it appears from our data that it is a very satisfactory substitute for the patient model in teaching and assessing trauma resuscitation skills in the ATLS program.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 052222867

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 20452620

DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2010.02.029


Related references

The standardized live patient and mechanical patient models--their roles in trauma teaching. Journal of Trauma 66(1): 98-102, 2009

The effectiveness of a human patient simulator in the ATLS shock skills station. Journal of Surgical Research 139(2): 229-235, 2007

Advanced trauma life support (ATLS) and facial trauma: can one size fit all? Part 2: ATLS, maxillofacial injuries and airway management dilemmas. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 37(4): 309-320, 2008

Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) and facial trauma: can one size fit all? Part 4: 'can the patient see?' Timely diagnosis, dilemmas and pitfalls in the multiply injured, poorly responsive/unresponsive patient. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 37(6): 505-514, 2008

Should Live Patient Licensing Examinations in Dentistry Be Discontinued? Two Viewpoints: Viewpoint 1: Alternative Assessment Models Are Not Yet Viable Replacements for Live Patients in Clinical Licensure Exams and Viewpoint 2: Ethical and Patient Care Concerns About Live Patient Exams Require Full Acceptance of Justifiable Alternatives. Journal of Dental Education 82(3): 246-251, 2018

The utility of Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) clinical shock grading in assessment of trauma. Emergency Medicine Journal 31(5): 384-389, 2014

Does ATLS trauma training fit into Western countries: evaluation of the first 8 years of ATLS in Germany. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 39(5): 517-522, 2013

Attrition of advanced trauma life support (ATLS) skills among ATLS instructors and providers in Mexico. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 195(3): 372-377, 2002

Is the ATLS classification of hypovolaemic shock appreciated in daily trauma care? An online-survey among 383 ATLS course directors and instructors. Emergency Medicine Journal 32(2): 134-137, 2015

Virtual medical trainer. Patient assessment and trauma care simulator. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 50: 309-315, 1998

Trauma assessment training with a patient simulator: a prospective, randomized study. Journal of Trauma 55(4): 651-657, 2003

A comparison of live tissue training and high-fidelity patient simulator: A pilot study in battlefield trauma training. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 79(4 Suppl 2): S157, 2015

Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) and facial trauma: can one size fit all? Part 3: Hypovolaemia and facial injuries in the multiply injured patient. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 37(5): 405-414, 2008

Can We Trust Simulator Performance Assessment? It Depends. Comparing Robotic Simulator Metrics Vs. GEARS on Simple Virtual Reality Exercises. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 24(7): S189-S190, 2017

Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) and facial trauma: can one size fit all? Part 1: dilemmas in the management of the multiply injured patient with coexisting facial injuries. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 37(3): 209-214, 2008