| Autor: |
Bukoski A; Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, 900 East Campus Drive, Columbia, MO 65211., Uhlich R; Department of Surgery, Division of Acute Care Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, 1 Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO 65212., Bowling F; United States Special Operations Command, 7701 Tampa Point Blvd, MacDill AFB, FL 33621., Shapiro M; Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC 27710., Kerby JD; Department of Surgery, Division of Acute Care Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, 1 Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO 65212., Llerena L; University of South Florida Health, Center for Advanced Medical Learning and Simulation (CAMLS), 124 South Franklin Street, Tampa, FL 33602., Armstrong JH; University of South Florida Health, Center for Advanced Medical Learning and Simulation (CAMLS), 124 South Franklin Street, Tampa, FL 33602., Strayhorn C; Information Visualization and Innovative Research (IVIR), 1626 Barber Road, Suite A, Sarasota, FL 34240., Barnes SL; Department of Surgery, Division of Acute Care Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, 1 Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO 65212. |
| Abstrakt: |
The relative effectiveness of live tissue (LT)- and inanimate simulation (SIM)-based training of combat medics is the subject of intense debate. A structured interview was utilized to determine the training modality preferences and the perceived value of LT- and SIM-based combat casualty care training of 25 senior special operations medics. Participant demographics and training experience, Likert scale-based assessment of training modality value, selection of preferred training modality for 11 combat casualty care procedures, and 12 open-ended questions probing opinions of the limitations and benefits of LT- and SIM-based training were collected from this convenience sample. All participants indicated significant combat medic experience and training. Of the 11 procedures questioned, LT was identified as superior for seven with mixed responses for the remaining four. LT was consistently identified as an essential training modality with tactile sensation and the physiologic responses of animal models to injury and therapy as primary benefits. Across procedures, 100% of participants felt that LT should be used in combat casualty care training and 96% felt that SIM should also be utilized. Repeatability and accuracy of size/weight were identified as key benefits of SIM training. Respondents reported that capability, self-confidence, success, and resilience of the combat medic all benefitted from LT training. The overriding theme was the general superiority of LT with recognition of the unique and complementary benefits of SIM. |
