Abstract Background Over the past decade, the use of technology‐enhanced simulation in emergency medicine (EM) education has grown, yet we still lack a clear understanding of its effectiveness. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesize studies evaluating the comparative effectiveness of technology‐enhanced simulation in EM. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify EM simulation research that compares technology‐enhanced simulation with other instructional modalities. Two reviewers screened articles for inclusion and abstracted information on learners, clinical topics, instructional design features, outcomes, cost, and study quality. Standardized mean difference (SMD) effect sizes were pooled using random effects. Results We identified 60 studies, enrolling at least 5279 learners. Of these, 23 compared technology‐enhanced simulation with another instructional modality (e.g., living humans, lecture, small group), and 37 compared two forms of technology‐enhanced simulation. Compared to lecture or small groups, we found simulation to have nonsignificant differences for time skills (SMD 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.23 to 0.89, n = 3), but a large, significant effect for non–time skills (SMD 0.82, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.46, n = 8). Comparison of alternative types of technology‐enhanced simulation found favorable associations with skills acquisition, of moderate magnitude, for computer‐assisted guidance (compared to no computer‐assisted guidance), for time skills (SMD 0.50, 95% CI −1.66 to 2.65, n = 2) and non–time skills (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.80, n = 6), and for more task repetitions (time skills SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.86, n = 2) and active participation (compared to observation) for time skills (SMD 0.85, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.45, n = 2) and non–time skills (SMD 0.33 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58, n = 3). Conclusions Technology‐enhanced simulation is effective for EM learners for skills acquisition. Features such as computer‐assisted guidance, repetition, and active learning are associated with greater effectiveness.
Barriers and facilitators to clinical information seeking: a systematic review
Abstract Objective The study sought to identify barriers to and facilitators of point-of-care information seeking and use of knowledge resources. Materials and Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library from 1991 to February 2017. We included qualitative studies in any language exploring barriers to and facilitators of point-of-care information seeking or use of electronic knowledge resources. Two authors independently extracted data on users, study design, and study quality. We inductively identified specific barriers or facilitators and from these synthesized a model of key determinants of information-seeking behaviors. Results Forty-five qualitative studies were included, reporting data derived from interviews (n = 26), focus groups (n = 21), ethnographies (n = 6), logs (n = 4), and usability studies (n = 2). Most studies were performed within the context of general medicine (n = 28) or medical specialties (n = 13). We inductively identified 58 specific barriers and facilitators and then created a model reflecting 5 key determinants of information-seeking behaviors: time includes subthemes of time availability, efficiency of information seeking, and urgency of information need; accessibility includes subthemes of hardware access, hardware speed, hardware portability, information restriction, and cost of resources; personal skills and attitudes includes subthemes of computer literacy, information-seeking skills, and contextual attitudes about information seeking; institutional attitudes, cultures, and policies includes subthemes describing external individual and institutional information-seeking influences; and knowledge resource features includes subthemes describing information-seeking efficiency, information content, information organization, resource familiarity, information credibility, information currency, workflow integration, compatibility of recommendations with local processes, and patient educational support. Conclusions Addressing these determinants of information-seeking behaviors may facilitate clinicians' question answering to improve patient care.
Electronic Knowledge Resources and Point-of-Care Learning: A Scoping Review
Purpose The authors sought to summarize quantitative and qualitative research addressing electronic knowledge resources and point-of-care learning in a scoping review. Method The authors searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database for studies addressing electronic knowledge resources and point-of-care learning. They iteratively revised inclusion criteria and operational definitions of study features and research themes of interest. Two reviewers independently performed each phase of study selection and data extraction. Results Of 10,811 studies identified, 305 were included and reviewed. Most studies (225; 74%) included physicians or medical students. The most frequently mentioned electronic resources were UpToDate (88; 29%), Micromedex (59; 19%), Epocrates (50; 16%), WebMD (46; 15%), MD Consult (32; 10%), and LexiComp (31; 10%). Eight studies (3%) evaluated electronic resources or point-of-care learning using outcomes of patient effects, and 36 studies (12%) reported objectively measured clinician behaviors. Twenty-five studies (8%) examined the clinical or educational impact of electronic knowledge resource use on patient care or clinician knowledge, 124 (41%) compared use rates of various knowledge resources, 69 (23%) examined the quality of knowledge resource content, and 115 (38%) explored the process of point-of-care learning. Two conceptual clarifications were identified, distinguishing the impact on clinical or educational outcomes versus the impact on test setting decision support, and the quality of information content versus the correctness of information obtained by a clinician–user. Conclusions Research on electronic knowledge resources is dominated by studies involving physicians and evaluating use rates. Studies involving nonphysician users, and evaluating resource impact and implementation, are needed.
Literature Searching in Medical Education: Online Tutorial Development from Idea to Creation