Objective: To analyze all published prospective, randomized, and blinded clinical studies on the proficiency-based progression (PBP) training using objective performance metrics. Background: The benefit of PBP methodology to learning clinical skills in comparison to conventional training is not settled. Methods: Search of PubMed, Cochrane library's Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases, from inception to 1st March 2020. Two independent reviewers extracted the data. The Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Results were pooled using biased corrected standardized mean difference and ratio-of-means. Summary effects were evaluated using a series of fixed and random effects models. The primary outcome was the number of procedural errors performed comparing PBP and non-PBP-based training pathways. Secondary outcomes were the number of procedural steps completed and the time to complete the task/procedure. Results: From the initial pool of 468 studies, 12 randomized clinical studies with a total of 239 participants were included in the analysis. In comparison to the non-PBP training, ratio-of-means results showed that PBP training reduced the number of performance errors by 60% (P < 0.001) and procedural time by 15% (P = 0.003) and increased the number of steps performed by 47% (P < 0.001). Conclusions and relevance: Our systematic review and meta-analysis confirms that PBP training in comparison to conventional or quality assured training improved trainees' performances, by decreasing procedural errors and procedural time, while increasing the number of correct steps taken when compared to standard simulation-based training.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on the Impact of Proficiency-based Progression Simulation Training on Performance Outcomes / E. Mazzone, S. Puliatti, M. Amato, B. Bunting, B. Rocco, F. Montorsi, A. Mottrie, A.G. Gallagher. - In: ANNALS OF SURGERY. - ISSN 0003-4932. - 274:2(2021), pp. 281-289. [10.1097/SLA.0000000000004650]

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on the Impact of Proficiency-based Progression Simulation Training on Performance Outcomes

B. Rocco;
2021

Abstract

Objective: To analyze all published prospective, randomized, and blinded clinical studies on the proficiency-based progression (PBP) training using objective performance metrics. Background: The benefit of PBP methodology to learning clinical skills in comparison to conventional training is not settled. Methods: Search of PubMed, Cochrane library's Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases, from inception to 1st March 2020. Two independent reviewers extracted the data. The Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Results were pooled using biased corrected standardized mean difference and ratio-of-means. Summary effects were evaluated using a series of fixed and random effects models. The primary outcome was the number of procedural errors performed comparing PBP and non-PBP-based training pathways. Secondary outcomes were the number of procedural steps completed and the time to complete the task/procedure. Results: From the initial pool of 468 studies, 12 randomized clinical studies with a total of 239 participants were included in the analysis. In comparison to the non-PBP training, ratio-of-means results showed that PBP training reduced the number of performance errors by 60% (P < 0.001) and procedural time by 15% (P = 0.003) and increased the number of steps performed by 47% (P < 0.001). Conclusions and relevance: Our systematic review and meta-analysis confirms that PBP training in comparison to conventional or quality assured training improved trainees' performances, by decreasing procedural errors and procedural time, while increasing the number of correct steps taken when compared to standard simulation-based training.
objective performance metrics; procedural errors, procedural steps; proficiency-based metrics; proficiency-based progression training; simulation-based training; Surgical training; technology-enhanced training
Settore MED/24 - Urologia
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
A_Systematic_Review_and_Meta_analysis_on_the.16 (2).pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 325.01 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
325.01 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/876236
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 8
  • Scopus 20
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 21
social impact