TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining medical simulators for simulation-based education in EUS

T2 - Theoretical approach and a narrative review

AU - Svendsen, Morten Bo Søndergaard

AU - Achiam, Michael Patrick

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 Spring Media. All rights reserved.

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - Choosing the right simulator for tasks in simulation-based education in medicine will affect the trainees' skills. However, there is a shortage in the vocabularies used for describing medical simulators and the contextual usage of simulators. We propose methods for approaching the task of choosing and defining the simulators needed, regardless of it being an acquisition or development process. It is advocated that efforts are made in defining the simulator's requirements before making any choice in regards to development processes. Multiple advantages are attained by keeping the simulator simple, both educational and development wise. Issues on validating simulators are discussed and highlighted as actions where interprofessional communication is likely to fail. The following conventional terms in medical education are problematic in regard to establishing a clear communication: Virtual reality, fidelity, validation, and simulation. The text is finalized in a short discussion on applying the methods in an EUS/endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) context. The work is the authors' interpretation of an invitation having the title 'Development of EUS and EBUS training models and simulators.'.

AB - Choosing the right simulator for tasks in simulation-based education in medicine will affect the trainees' skills. However, there is a shortage in the vocabularies used for describing medical simulators and the contextual usage of simulators. We propose methods for approaching the task of choosing and defining the simulators needed, regardless of it being an acquisition or development process. It is advocated that efforts are made in defining the simulator's requirements before making any choice in regards to development processes. Multiple advantages are attained by keeping the simulator simple, both educational and development wise. Issues on validating simulators are discussed and highlighted as actions where interprofessional communication is likely to fail. The following conventional terms in medical education are problematic in regard to establishing a clear communication: Virtual reality, fidelity, validation, and simulation. The text is finalized in a short discussion on applying the methods in an EUS/endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) context. The work is the authors' interpretation of an invitation having the title 'Development of EUS and EBUS training models and simulators.'.

KW - curriculum design

KW - simulator choice

KW - simulator design

U2 - 10.4103/EUS-D-21-00123

DO - 10.4103/EUS-D-21-00123

M3 - Review

C2 - 35488621

AN - SCOPUS:85129276742

VL - 11

SP - 95

EP - 103

JO - Endoscopic Ultrasound

JF - Endoscopic Ultrasound

SN - 2226-7190

IS - 2

ER -