The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 25 , ISSUE 5 ( May, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Low-fidelity Medical Simulation: Relevance in the Learning of Dental Students in South Africa

Dalenda Hadyaoui, Hanen Boukhris, Zeineb Riahi, Imen Kalghoum

Keywords : Assessments, Corono-radicular reconstruction, Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare, Dental students, Simulation-based learning

Citation Information : Hadyaoui D, Boukhris H, Riahi Z, Kalghoum I. Low-fidelity Medical Simulation: Relevance in the Learning of Dental Students in South Africa. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (5):463-472.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3695

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 05-08-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: Healthcare embraces simulation's learning boost, from medicine to dentistry. But can it unlock the secrets of intricate fixed prosthodontics? This study takes a pioneering step to find out. Aim: To evaluate low-fidelity medical simulation (LFMSim) in fixed prosthodontics by assessing its effectiveness in training corono-radicular preparations and by exploring participants’ perceptions of LFMSim as an innovative teaching tool for developing pre-practice skills. Materials and methods: A prospective, descriptive study was executed to explore these facets among 6th-year students. The Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH©) evaluation grid, student version, was employed for assessment. The study encompassed one week, from 03/03/2023 to 10/03/2023. Results: The study involved 28 learners with an average age of 23 and a sex ratio of 0.33, half of whom had prior exposure to simulation sessions. Seventy-five percent of participants watched the instructional video a day before the simulation, with nine expressing presession stress. Overall, 19% of students found the session as expected, while 43% considered it better than anticipated. Satisfaction levels varied, with 50% indicating they were “rather satisfied,” and 46.4% expressing absolute satisfaction. The Debriefing Assessment using DASH yielded an average score of 4.85. Conclusion: The study's findings shed light on the effectiveness of LFMSim in training corono-radicular preparations and post-space impressions for fixed prosthodontics among 6th-year students. The varied satisfaction levels and the emphasis on debriefing discussions suggest avenues for improving simulation sessions in the future. Clinical significance: These insights are pertinent for educators and institutions aiming to enhance dental education through innovative teaching tools like simulation. By refining simulation sessions based on debriefing feedback, educators can better prepare students for real-world clinical scenarios, ultimately improving patient care outcomes. This highlights the practical importance of incorporating simulation-based learning into dental curricula.


PDF Share
  1. Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc 2007;2(2):115–125. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539.
  2. Society for Simulation in Healthcare. Council for Accreditation of Healthcare Simulation Programs, Accreditation standards and Measurement Criteria. Minneapolis: SSH; 2010.
  3. Haute Autorité de Santé (French National Authority for Health). Guide to Good Practices in Health Simulation. Evaluation and Improvement of Practices. Paris: HAS; 2012.
  4. Jeffries PR. A framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing. Nurs Educ Perspect 2005;26(2):96–103. PMID: 15921126.
  5. Dieckmann P. Using simulation for education, training and research. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers; 2009.
  6. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, et al. A critical review of simulation-based education research: 2003–2009. Med Educ 2010;44(1):50–63. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x.
  7. L'Her E, Geeraerts T, Desclefs JP, et al. Simulation-based teaching in critical care, anaesthesia, and emergency medicine. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med 2020;39:311–326. DOI: 10.1016/j.accpm.2020.03.010.
  8. Rall M, Manser T, Howard S. Key elements of debriefing for simulator training. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2000;17:516–517. DOI: 10.1016/j.accpm.2020.03.010.
  9. Durand C, Secheresse T, Leconte M. The interest of the DASH grid for evaluating the quality of debriefings: A study within a simulation program around neonatal resuscitation in the delivery room. Arch Pediatr 2017;1–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.arcped.2017.10.008.
  10. Knowles M. The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy to Andragogy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1980.
  11. Guraya SY, Abdalla ME. Determining the effectiveness of clinical simulation in teaching undergraduate dental students: A systematic review. Saudi Med J 2019;40(9):907–916. DOI: 10.15537/smj.2019.9.24479.
  12. Boet S, Sharma S, Goldman J, et al. Medical education research: Qualitative data analysis and evidence synthesis. Simulation in Healthcare 2020;15(5):377–384.
  13. Hartman N, Wittler M, Askew K, et al. Validation of a performance checklist for ultrasound-guided internal jugular central lines for use in procedural instruction and assessment. Postgrad Med J 2017;93:67–70. DOI: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2015-133 632.
  14. Kennedy CC, Cannon EK, Warner DO, et al. Advanced airway management simulation training in medical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 2014;42:169–178. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31829a721f.
  15. Lalonde M, Malouin-Benoit MC, Michon A, et al. Evaluation of nursing students’ satisfaction following their participation in an interprofessional simulation: A case study. Rev Francoph Int Rech Infirm 2017;3:253–261. DOI: 10.1016/j.refiri.2017.07.009.
  16. Ciceron F, Besch G, Benkhadra M, et al. Comparison of 2 debriefing methods after simulation on the technical competence score: DEBRIEF-SIM study. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2014;33S:A200–A203.
  17. Chernikova O, Heitzmann N, Stadler M, et al. Simulation-based learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 2020;90(4):499–541.
  18. Vermunt JD. Understanding, measuring and improving simulation-based learning in higher education: Student and teacher learning perspectives. Learn Instr 2023;86:101773. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101773.
  19. Levin O. Simulation as a pedagogical model for deep learning in teacher education. Teach Teach Educ 2024;143:104571. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2024.104571.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.