Introduction:
Endotracheal intubation may not always be possible. Therefore, in rare cases where endotracheal intubation is not possible, surgical airway interventions may be needed. In this context, we aimed to evaluate and compare manikin- and cadaver-based surgical airway simulation training programs developed using the ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) model for emergency medicine resident doctors (EMRDs).
Materials & Methods
Thirty-one EMRDs included in the study were first administered a pretest and they were divided into a manikin-based surgical airway simulation training group (group M) and a cadaver-based surgical airway simulation training group (group C), depending on whether they had less or more than two years of experience and based on their pretest scores.16 EMRDs practiced the skill on the whole body cadaver and 15 EMRDs practiced the skill on the 3D printed cricothyrotomy model. An evaluation was made based on the first two levels of the Kirkpatrick model.1stLevel - Reaction: EMRDs’ reactions were evaluated with a 5-point Likert-type surgical airway simulation training program satisfaction survey. 2ndLevel- Learning: EMRDs’ learning levels were evaluated via the cricothyrotomy skill assessment guide at baseline and one month later. 5 participants in each group left the study during the skill assessment 1 month later.
Results
The average of the satisfaction survey scores of the Group C was 4.85 ± 0.16, and the average of the satisfaction survey scores of the Group M was 4.82 ± 0.20. There was no statistical difference between the average satisfaction survey scores of both groups (p = 0.623). More than half of the EMRDs in both groups successfully performed the cricothyrotomy procedure at first application (Group C success rate %56.3, Group M success rate %73.3).Yet, the EMRDs in group M were significantly more successful than those in group C (p < 0.01). One month later, all EMRDs in both groups completed the procedure successfully.
Conclusions
The average of the satisfaction survey scores of the Group C was 4.85 ± 0.16, Group M was 4.82 ± 0.20. In the first application of cricothyrotomy, the success rate of Group C was 56.3%, the success rate of Group M was 73.3%, and in the application 1 month later, the success rate of both groups was determined as 100.