Comparing In Vivo versus Simulation Training for Transnasal Endoscopy Skills.

LL Wolford, GW Wolford - Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences …, 2020 - ERIC
LL Wolford, GW Wolford
Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences & Disorders, 2020ERIC
Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluations of swallowing (FEES) is as important of a swallowing
evaluation as the videoflouroscopic swallow study, but far fewer speech-language
pathologists are competent in its use (Ambika, Datta, Manjula, Warawantkar, & Thomas,
2019; Brady & Donzelli, 2013; Pisegna & Langmore, 2016). One hurdle in FEES training is
the necessity of practicing transnasal endoscopy on volunteers. The primary aim of this
study was to compare the learning effectiveness of practicing transnasal endoscopy via …
Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluations of swallowing (FEES) is as important of a swallowing evaluation as the videoflouroscopic swallow study, but far fewer speech-language pathologists are competent in its use (Ambika, Datta, Manjula, Warawantkar, & Thomas, 2019; Brady & Donzelli, 2013; Pisegna & Langmore, 2016). One hurdle in FEES training is the necessity of practicing transnasal endoscopy on volunteers. The primary aim of this study was to compare the learning effectiveness of practicing transnasal endoscopy via simulation with practice in vivo for a student's first passes of the endoscope. The end goal of this study was to determine the most cost-effective and feasible means of teaching transnasal endoscopy to graduate clinicians. Twenty-one graduate students practiced transnasal endoscopy in one of three conditions: in vivo, high-fidelity lifelike simulation, low-fidelity non-lifelike simulation. The learning outcomes assessed were speed of endoscopy, student confidence,
ERIC
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果