Abstract:
Simulation is accepted as an effective method of learning procedural skills. However, the translational outcomes of skills acquired through simulation still warrants investigation. We designed this study to assess if skills laboratory training in addition to bedside learning (intervention group [IG]) would provide better learning results than bedside learning alone (control group [CG]) in the context of venipuncture training. This prospective, cluster-randomized, single-blind study took place at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Seventeen clusters of second-year medical students were randomly assigned to either IG or CG. The IG trained on venipuncture in the skills laboratory, receiving instruction after modified Payton’s Four Step Method. Following the training, students of both IG and CG underwent bedside learning for one month. Afterward, students of both groups performed venipuncture on actual patients in a clinical setting. An independent, blinded assessor scored students’ performance using the Integrated Procedural Protocol Instrument (IPPI) and a checklist. Patients assessed students’ performance with the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT). Eight and nine clusters were randomized to the intervention and control groups, respectively. IG completed significantly more single steps of the procedure correctly (IG: 19.36 ± 3.87 for checklist items; CG: 15.57 ± 4.95; p < 0.001). IG also scored significantly better on IPPI ratings (median: IG: 27 (12) vs. CG: 21 (8); p < 0.001). Rated by patients, students’ communication skills did not significantly differ between the two groups. Simulation-based venipuncture training enabled students to perform the procedure on actual patients with a higher technical accuracy than students who learned venipuncture at the bedside. Students were able to transfer the skills acquired through venipuncture training at the skill laboratory to the bedside.