The Effectiveness of Training on Auscultation of Heart with a Simulator of Cardiology in Medical Students

2021

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3889/oamjms.2021.7247
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Abstract The purpose of this study was to determine whether the training module with a simulator of cardiology improves auscultation skills in medical students. Methods. Medical students of the third year after completing the module of the cardiovascular system of the discipline “Propaedeutics of internal diseases, passed a two-hour or four-hour training module in clinical auscultation with retesting immediately after the intervention and in the fourth year. The control group consisted of fourth-year medical students who had no intervention. Results. The diagnostic accuracy in two-hour training was 45.9% vs 35.3% in four-hour training p <.001. The use of a cardio simulator significantly increased the accurate detection of mitral regurgitation immediately after training on a simulator (more than 73%) p <.001. The next academic year, regression was observed in the diagnostic accuracy of mitral insufficiency in the intervention group after six months of observation by 4%. The auscultation skills of students at the bedside of real patients did not increase after training on a simulator: the accuracy of diagnosis of the auscultatory picture of the defect was equally low in the intervention group and the control group (35.0% vs 30.8%, p = 0.651). Conclusions. Two-hour training was more effective than four-hour training. After training on cardiac auscultation using a patient’s cardiological simulator, the accuracy rate was low in a situation close to the clinical conditions and a clinic on a real patient.