Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38468577›Full record

ArticleLa Tunisie medicale2023

Houda Ajmi, Manel Ben Selma, Habiba Ben Sik Ali, Nada Boukadida, Hela ElGhali, Aya Ben Oune, Meissa Maghzaoui, Nadia Amara, Walid Naija, Saoussan Abroug

Open access · greenAbstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in La Tunisie medicale, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Houda AjmiDepartment of pediatrics, Sahloul University Hospital, 4054, Sousse, Tunisia.
Manel Ben SelmaDepartment of pediatrics, Sahloul University Hospital, 4054, Sousse, Tunisia.
Habiba Ben Sik AliMedical simulation center, Faculty of Medicine of Monastir, University of Monastir, Tunisia.
Nada BoukadidaDepartment of pediatrics, Sahloul University Hospital, 4054, Sousse, Tunisia.
Hela ElGhaliDepartment of hygiene, Sahloul University Hospital, 4054, Sousse, Tunisia.
Aya Ben OuneHigher school of sciences and techniques of health of Sousse, University of Sousse, Tunisia.
Meissa MaghzaouiHigher school of sciences and techniques of health of Sousse, University of Sousse, Tunisia.
Nadia AmaraHigher school of sciences and techniques of health of Sousse, University of Sousse, Tunisia.
Walid NaijaMedical simulation center, Faculty of Medicine Ibn Al Jazzar, Sousse, University of Sousse, Tunisia.
Saoussan AbrougDepartment of pediatrics, Sahloul University Hospital, 4054, Sousse, Tunisia.
Hôpital Sahloul · TNUniversity of Sousse · TNUniversity of Monastir · TN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMedical simulation is a crucial educational tool for training healthcare professionals, renowned for its effectiveness in learning. However, its application as an assessment tool remains uncommon.

aimTo evaluate simulation as a tool for assessing training in the management of COVID-19 patients.

methodsThis descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in June 2021 at the Department of Pediatrics, Sahloul University Hospital in Sousse, Tunisia. All medical and paramedical staff in the department underwent comprehensive training in the management of COVID-19 patients, including video training for donning and doffing protective equipment when in contact with infected patients. A simulation-based assessment of these procedures was carried out among the department staff having received this training.

resultsOur study included a total of 67 participants, comprising 28 medical staff (41.8%) and 39 paramedical staff (58.2%). During the assessment scenario, over 50% of participants successfully completed the main steps for both donning (8 out of 11 steps) and doffing procedures (10 out of 11 steps). However, there were instances of incorrect execution in some critical steps. In the doffing test, only 16.4% of participants performed the fitcheck correctly, with a notable difference between paramedical staff and medical staff (25.6% vs 3.6%, p=0.02). The practice of double gloving was observed in only 38.8% of cases, with higher adherence among physicians compared to paramedical staff (57.1% vs 25.6%, p=0.009). Regarding the doffing procedure, we observed that not all staff performed hydroalcoholic friction adequately. Similarly, only 22.4% of participants followed the recommended sequence of gestures, with a significantly higher compliance rate among doctors compared to paramedical staff (50% vs 2.6%, p<0.001).

conclusionsSimulation is a swiftly expanding assessment tool. In our study, it helped reveal specific skill deficiencies that would have gone unnoticed in written or oral assessments.

Indexed as

COVID-19ChildCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansLearningPersonal Protective Equipment

Identifiers

PMID38468577
PMCPMC11261475
OpenAlexW4394765914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.