Live tissue versus synthetic tissue training for critical procedures: No difference in performance, study finds

Date:: January 23, 2018
Source:: Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
Summary:: Training on the synthetic training model (STM) or live tissue (LT) model does not result in a difference in subsequent performance for five of the seven critical procedures examined: junctional hemorrhage wound packing, tourniquet, chest seal, nasopharyngeal airway, and needle thoracostomy, according to a new study.
Share:: Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIN Email

FULL STORY

Training on the synthetic training model (STM) or live tissue (LT) model does not result in a difference in subsequent performance for five of the seven critical procedures examined: junctional hemorrhage wound packing, tourniquet, chest seal, nasopharyngeal airway, and needle thoracostomy. That is the primary finding of a study reported in the Proceedings of the 2017 AEM Consensus Conference, to be published in the February 2018 issue of Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM), a journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM).

The lead author of the study is Danielle Hart, MD, MACM, program director for emergency medicine at Hennepin County Medical Center (HCMC), Minneapolis, Minnesota, and the director of simulation for HCMC's Interdisciplinary Simulation and Education Center (ISEC).

The study, by Hart, et al, indicates that until synthetic training models are developed with improved anthropomorphic and tissue fidelity, there may still be a role for live tissue for training tube thoracostomy and potentially cricothyrotomy.

While these results begin to uncover the effects of training and assessing these procedures on various models, these findings indicate that further study is needed to ascertain how well performance on an STM or LT model translates to the human model.

William Bond, MD, co-chair of the 2017 AEM Consensus Conference and director of simulation research at the Jump Trading Simulation and Education Center, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria commented:

"Hart, et al. shows the many challenges involved in simulation research. In particular, their group should be commended for their attempt to control for the test on training model effect, and training order effect. The article shares the simulation training experience for a number of procedures relevant to emergency medicine, trauma teams, and military medicine."

RELATED TOPICS
- Health & Medicine

RELATED TERMS

Story Source:

Materials provided by Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:

Danielle Hart, Robert Rush, Gregory Rule, Joseph Clinton, Gregory Beilman, Shilo Anders, Rachel Brown, Mary Ann McNeil, Troy Reihsen, Jeffrey Chipman, Robert Sweet. Training and Assessing Critical Airway, Breathing, and Hemorrhage Control Procedures for Trauma Care: Live Tissue Versus Synthetic Models. Academic Emergency Medicine, 2017; DOI: 10.1111/acem.13340

Cite This Page:

Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. "Live tissue versus synthetic tissue training for critical procedures: No difference in performance, study finds." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 23 January 2018. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180123171458.htm>.

Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. (2018, January 23). Live tissue versus synthetic tissue training for critical procedures: No difference in performance, study finds. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 10, 2023 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180123171458.htm

Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. "Live tissue versus synthetic tissue training for critical procedures: No difference in performance, study finds." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180123171458.htm (accessed December 10, 2023).

Explore More

from ScienceDaily