Simulation in medical education: a synopsis (Rev Med Chile 2013; 141: 70-79).

We report two cases of Caesarean section in patients with Marfan's syndrome where continuous subarachnoid anaesthesia failed to provide an adequate surgical block. This was possibly because of dural ectasia, which was confirmed by a computed tomography scan in both cases.

The sudden rise of critically ill patients secondary to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has triggered a surge in healthcare response. This project's goal was to provide essential cognitive and technical skills to healthcare professionals returning to the workforce or reassigned to critical care clinical duties during the COVID-19 pandemic. The plan included the implementation of 4 distance-based simulation training programs, with asynchronous personalized feedback. The courses allowed the acquisition of skills for the complete critical care patient management chain: use of personal protection equipment, use of a high-flow nasal cannula, endotracheal intubation, and prone positioning. Participants logged into the platform, reviewed material, practiced while recording the session, and uploaded the video through the training platform. The expert tutor remotely delivered asynchronous feedback. Participants trained remotely until achieving course approval. Remote-based simulation seems a feasible and attractive alternative to provide adequate educational solutions, especially for remote and rural areas.

BackgroundCentral venous catheterization (CVC) is a basic requirement for many medical specialties. Simulated training in CVC may allow the acquisition of this competency but few reports have established a valid methodology for learning and acquiring procedural skills for CVC. This study aims to validate the use of a tracking motion device, the imperial college surgical assessment device (ICSAD), by comparing it with validated global rating scales (GRS) to measure CVC performance in a simulated torso.MethodsSenior year medical students, first and last year residents (PGY1, LYR), and expert anesthesiologists performed a jugular CVC assessment in a simulated model (Laerdal IV Torso). A validated GRS for objective assessment of technical skills and motion analysis by ICSAD was used. Statistical analysis was performed through Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests for construct validity and Spearman correlation coefficients between the ICSAD and GRS scores for concurrent validity between both.Results32 subjects were recruited (10 medical students, 8 PGY1, 8 LYR and 8 experts). Total path length measured with ICSAD and GRS scores were significantly different between all groups, except for LYR compared to experts (p = 0.664 for GRS and p = 0.72 for ICSAD). Regarding jugular CVC procedural time, LYR and experts were faster than PGY1 and MS (p < 0.05). Spearman correlation coefficient was −0.684 (p < 0.001) between ICSAD and GRS scores.ConclusionsICSAD is a valid tool for assessment of jugular CVC since it differentiates between expert and novice subjects, and correlates with a validated GRS for jugular CVC in a simulated torso.