Virtual Antenatal Encounter and Standardized Simulation Assessment (VANESSA): Pilot Study
| Autor: | Douglas R. Danforth, Rachel A. Umoren, Jennifer C. Kett, Megan M. Gray, Taylor Sawyer, Kellen Maicher, Patrick Motz |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Original Paper
Closed-ended question Descriptive statistics media_common.quotation_subject Rehabilitation Biomedical Engineering Physical Therapy Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation Empathy Anger simulation ethics Computer Science Applications Sadness 03 medical and health sciences Psychiatry and Mental health 0302 clinical medicine Virtual patient 030225 pediatrics prenatal counseling Happiness 030212 general & internal medicine Thematic analysis Psychology media_common Clinical psychology |
| Zdroj: | JMIR Serious Games |
| ISSN: | 2291-9279 |
| DOI: | 10.2196/games.9611 |
| Popis: | Background: Prenatal counseling at the limits of newborn viability involves sensitive interactions between neonatal providers and families. Empathetic discussions are currently learned through practice in times of high stress. Decision aids may help improve provider communication but have not been universally adopted. Virtual standardized patients are increasingly recognized as a modality for education, but prenatal counseling simulations have not been described. To be valuable as a tool, a virtual patient would need to accurately portray emotions and elicit a realistic response from the provider. Objective: To determine if neonatal providers can accurately identify a standardized virtual prenatal patient’s emotional states and examine the frequency of empathic responses to statements made by the patient. Methods: A panel of Neonatologists, Simulation Specialists, and Ethicists developed a dialogue and identified empathic responses. Virtual Antenatal Encounter and Standardized Simulation Assessment (VANESSA), a screen-based simulation of a woman at 23 weeks gestation, was capable of displaying anger, fear, sadness, and happiness through animations. Twenty-four neonatal providers, including a subgroup with an ethics interest, were asked to identify VANESSA’s emotions 28 times, respond to statements, and answer open-ended questions. The emotions were displayed in different formats: without dialogue, with text dialogue, and with audio dialogue. Participants completed a post-encounter survey describing demographics and experience. Data were reported using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data from open ended questions (eg, “What would you do?”) were examined using thematic analysis. Results: Half of our participants had over 10 years of clinical experience. Most participants reported using medical research (18/23, 78%) and mortality calculators (17/23, 74%). Only the ethics-interested subgroup (10/23, 43%) listed counseling literature (7/10, 70%). Of 672 attempts, participants accurately identified VANESSA’s emotions 77.8% (523/672) of the time, and most (14/23, 61%) reported that they were confident in identifying these emotions. The ethics interest group was more likely to choose empathic responses (P=.002). Participants rated VANESSA as easy to use (22/23, 96%) and reported that she had realistic dialogue (15/23, 65%). Conclusions: This pilot study shows that a prenatal counseling simulation is feasible and can yield useful data on prenatal counseling communication. Our participants showed a high rate of emotion recognition and empathy in their responses. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|