IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v50y2019i2p102-123.html

Does Repeated Exposure to Critical Situations in a Screen-Based Simulation Improve the Self-Assessment of Non-Technical Skills in Postpartum Hemorrhage Management?

Author

Listed:
  • Jessy Barré
  • Daphné Michelet
  • Anais Job
  • Jennifer Truchot
  • Philippe Cabon
  • Catherine Delgoulet
  • Antoine Tesnière

Abstract

Background. Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal death in the world. Non-technical skills (e.g. communication) are now recognized as a contributing factor to medical safety. In the field of simulation, screen-based simulations are currently very popular with computer/technological development. This study evaluates a screen-based simulation device, PerinatSims , developed to improve technical and non-technical skills in PPH situation. This experiment hypothesized that exposure and repetition of training with PerinatSims would improve the self-assessment of non-technical skills , and therefore increase the ability to manage PPH. Methods. The primary endpoint was a self-assessment of non-technical skills during simulation session of PPH on a digital simulator . Twenty French midwives performed three of nine 25 minutes sessions of PPH screen-based simulation. Four self-assessment questionnaires were administered at the end of each simulation session: a leadership/team working questionnaire ( BAT ), a negative feelings/emotional questionnaire ( DASS-21 ), a Flow questionnaire and a mental load questionnaire ( NASA-TLX ). Results between sessions were compared using a repeated measures ANOVA followed by a Bonferroni post hoc test. Results. The study showed a positive evolution during the three screen-based simulation sessions : an increase of leadership and team working self-assessment, an increase of Flow sense, and a decrease of negative emotions (anxiety and depression in the DASS-21 score). Significant decrease of stress was found only between the second and the third sessions, and significant differences in the NASA-TLX were observed only in two dimensions, Performance and Frustration. Conclusion. A repeated exposure to PPH situations with a screen-based simulation tool improved the midwives’ self-assessment, especially for leadership, team working, emotion management and Flow sense . Furthermore, midwives had a very positive feedback on the device. They highlighted the desire to use PerinatSims more often to be trained to PPH management, for technical as well as non-technical skills.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessy Barré & Daphné Michelet & Anais Job & Jennifer Truchot & Philippe Cabon & Catherine Delgoulet & Antoine Tesnière, 2019. "Does Repeated Exposure to Critical Situations in a Screen-Based Simulation Improve the Self-Assessment of Non-Technical Skills in Postpartum Hemorrhage Management?," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 50(2), pages 102-123, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:50:y:2019:i:2:p:102-123
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878119827324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878119827324
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878119827324?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rosemary Garris & Robert Ahlers & James E. Driskell, 2002. "Games, Motivation, and Learning: A Research and Practice Model," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 33(4), pages 441-467, December.
    2. Siegfried Streufert & Usha Satish & Paul Barach, 2001. "Improving Medical Care: The Use of Simulation Technology," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 32(2), pages 164-174, June.
    3. David Crookall, 2010. "Serious Games, Debriefing, and Simulation/Gaming as a Discipline," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(6), pages 898-920, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. J. Tuomas Harviainen, 2019. "Editorial to the April Issue," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 50(2), pages 99-101, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Apinya Dhatsuwan & Monamorn Precharattana, 2016. "Blockyland," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(4), pages 445-464, August.
    2. Marcin Wardaszko & Błażej Podgórski, 2017. "Mobile Learning Game Effectiveness in Cognitive Learning by Adults: A Comparative Study," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(4), pages 435-454, August.
    3. Katelyn Procci & Shan Lakhmani & Talib S. Hussain & Clint A. Bowers, 2014. "Opening Cinematics," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(1), pages 93-124, February.
    4. Elizabeth Koh & Yeo Gee Kin & Bimlesh Wadhwa & John Lim, 2012. "Teacher Perceptions of Games in Singapore Schools," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 51-66, February.
    5. Michael Filsecker & Michael Kerres, 2014. "Engagement as a Volitional Construct," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(4-5), pages 450-470, August.
    6. Christle Grace G. Carabeo & Charisse May M. Dalida & Erica Marla Z. Padilla & Ma. Mercedes T. Rodrigo, 2014. "Stroke Patient Rehabilitation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(2), pages 151-166, April.
    7. Carolina Islas Sedano & Verona Leendertz & Mikko Vinni & Erkki Sutinen & Suria Ellis, 2013. "Hypercontextualized Learning Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(6), pages 821-845, December.
    8. Klaus Eisenack, 2013. "A Climate Change Board Game for Interdisciplinary Communication and Education," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(2-3), pages 328-348, April.
    9. Timothy C. Clapper, 2014. "Situational Interest and Instructional Design," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(2), pages 167-182, April.
    10. Silke Geithner & Daniela Menzel, 2016. "Effectiveness of Learning Through Experience and Reflection in a Project Management Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(2), pages 228-256, April.
    11. David Kaufman & Louise Sauvé & Lise Renaud & Andrew Sixsmith & Ben Mortenson, 2016. "Older Adults’ Digital Gameplay," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(4), pages 465-489, August.
    12. Jonna Koponen & Saara Julkunen, 2015. "Theoretical Principles of Simulation-Based Sales Communication Training," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(2), pages 137-147, April.
    13. Aad Slootmaker & Hans Hummel & Rob Koper, 2017. "Evaluating the Usability of Authoring Environments for Serious Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(4), pages 553-578, August.
    14. Christelle Mariais & Florence Michau & Jean-Philippe Pernin, 2012. "A Description Grid to Support the Design of Learning Role-Play Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 23-33, February.
    15. Frank Ulrich & Niels Henrik Helms, 2017. "CREATING EVALUATION PROFILES FOR GAMES DESIGNED TO BE FUN: An Interpretive Framework for Serious Game Mechanics," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(5), pages 695-714, October.
    16. David Kirschner & J. Patrick Williams, 2014. "Measuring Video Game Engagement Through Gameplay Reviews," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(4-5), pages 593-610, August.
    17. Korina Katsaliaki & Navonil Mustafee, 2015. "Edutainment for Sustainable Development," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(6), pages 647-672, December.
    18. Jop van den Hoogen & Julia Lo & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2016. "Debriefing Research Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(3), pages 368-388, June.
    19. Marco Greco & Nicola Baldissin & Fabio Nonino, 2013. "An Exploratory Taxonomy of Business Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(5), pages 645-682, October.
    20. Frederick M. C. van Amstel & Julia A. Garde, 2016. "The Transformative Potential of Game Spatiality in Service Design," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(5), pages 628-650, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:50:y:2019:i:2:p:102-123. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.