Introduction: Medical simulation takes advantage of contextual and experiential learning by allowing trainees to practice in realistic environments prior to actual patient care. Although proponents argue that patient simulation can fundamentally enhance both medical education and patient safety, large-scale experience with advanced simulation technologies is limited. To explore expert opinion on the topic, we convened a conference of educational leaders and simulation experts to provide recommendations for how this field should be directed on a broad scale to improve the training of future health professionals. This document summarizes the proceedings of that conference.
Methods: We issued a request for applications to all U.S. and Canadian medical schools within the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), seeking a diverse group of institutional teams committed to an in-depth exploration of the topic. Of 33 applications, nine medical schools were selected to participate. Once on site, eight working groups were formed, each comprised of representatives across sites and roles, including deans, clerkship and program directors, content experts, and trainees. We addressed four key topics, which are subsequently summarized for presentation in this report: 1) education (How can medical simulation contribute to the education of trainees?), 2) assessment (What is the role of simulation in evaluating trainees in the context of general competencies?), 3) research (How should we develop a research agenda to evaluate simulation?), and 4) implementation (How should simulation technologies be developed and managed within and across institutions?).
Results: Participants in the conference generally agreed that simulation offers a conducive environment for focused reflection and critical thought. Although there was consensus that medical simulation can provide a robust platform for performance assessment, most participants thought that the research basis for high-stakes assessment was still too immature for widespread implementation. Participants generally agreed that sufficiently powered research will require interinstitutional collaboration on uniform curricula and meaningful outcome tools, and that both biomedical and social science research paradigms will need to be applied to the questions at hand. Common barriers to medical simulation include both real and perceived lack of resources, poor understanding among faculty regarding the nature of the tools and techniques, and the inherent complexity of multidisciplinary collaboration.
Conclusions: Medical simulation can and should be used to complement current methods of medical education. Educators should make thoughtful choices among simulation modalities to help trainees most effectively achieve learning objectives. Simulation researchers should prioritize the development and validation of clinical performance tools and other defined outcome measures on which meaningful large-scale research can be anchored. Finally, national collaboration should be encouraged and fostered by institutions and funding agencies.