TY - JOUR T1 - Impact of educational instruction on medical student performance in simulation patient AU - Glosser, L.D. AU - Lombardi, C.V. AU - Hopper, W.A. AU - Chen, Y. AU - Young, A.N. AU - Oberneder, E. AU - Veria, S. AU - Talbot, B.A. AU - Bodi, S.M. AU - Matus, C.D. KW - simulated patient encounters KW - clinical reasoning KW - medical education KW - educational intervention KW - curriculum development KW - PY - 2022/06/23 Y1 - 2022/06/12 VL - 13 N1 - doi: 10.5116/ijme.62a5.96bf DO - 10.5116/ijme.62a5.96bf M3 - doi: 10.5116/ijme.62a5.96bf JO - Int J Med Educ SP - 158 EP - 170 PB - IJME SN - 2042-6372 UR - http://www.ijme.net/archive/13/peri-simulation-teaching-improves-learning/ L1 - http://www.ijme.net/archive/13/peri-simulation-teaching-improves-learning.pdf N2 - Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effects, and timing of, a video educational intervention on medical student performance in manikin-based simulation patient encounters. Methods: This prospective mixed-methods study was conducted as part of the University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences undergraduate medical curriculum. One hundred sixty-six students second-year students participated in two simulations on a single day in September 2021. A 7-minute video intervention outlining the clinical diagnostic approach to pulmonary complaints was implemented. Students were randomized into 32 groups which were divided into two cohorts. One received the video prior to simulation-1 (n=83) and the other between simulation-1 and simulation-2 (n=83). Each simulation was recorded and assessed using a 44-point standardized checklist. Comparative analysis to determine differences in performance scores was performed using independent t-tests and paired t-tests. Results: Independent t-tests revealed the video-prior cohort performed better in simulation-1 (t= 2.27, p= .03), however in simulation-2 no significant difference was observed between the cohorts. Paired t-test analysis revealed the video-between cohort had significant improvement from simulation-1 to simulation-2 (t= 3.06, p = .01); no significant difference was found for the video-prior cohort. Less prompting was seen in simulation-2 among both the video-prior (t= –2.83, p= .01) and video-between cohorts (t= –2.18, p= .04). Conclusions: Simulation training, and targeted educational interventions, facilitate medical students to become clinically competent practitioners. Our findings indicate that guided video instruction advances students' clinical performance greater than learning through simulation alone. To confirm these findings, similar investigations in other clinical training exercises should be considered. ER -