Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Simulator-based versus Traditional Teaching of Direct Ophthalmoscopy for Medical Students

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare results of simulator-based vs traditional training of medical students in direct ophthalmoscopy.DesignRandomized controlled trial.MethodsFirst-year medical student volunteers completed 1 hour of didactic instruction regarding direct ophthalmoscopes, fundus anatomy, and signs of disease. Students were randomized to an additional hour of training on a direct ophthalmoscope simulator (n = 17) or supervised practice examining classmates (traditional method, n = 16). After 1 week of independent student practice using assigned training methods, masked ophthalmologist observers assessed student ophthalmoscopy skills (technique, efficiency, and global performance) during examination of 5 patient volunteers, using 5-point Likert scales. Students recorded findings and lesion location for each patient. Two masked ophthalmologists graded answer sheets independently using 3-point scales. Students completed surveys before randomization and after assessments. Training groups were compared for grades, observer- and patient-assigned scores, and survey responses.ResultsThe simulator group reported longer practice times than the traditional group (P = .002). Observers assigned higher technique scores to the simulator group after adjustment for practice time (P = .034). Combined grades (maximum points = 20) were higher for the simulator group (median: 5.0, range: 0.0-11.0) than for the traditional group (median: 4.0, range: 0.0-9.0), although the difference was not significant. The simulator group was less likely to mistake the location of a macular scar in 1 patient (odds ratio: 0.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.056-1.35, P = .013).ConclusionsDirect ophthalmoscopy is difficult, regardless of training technique, but simulator-based training has apparent advantages, including improved technique, the ability to localize fundus lesions, and a fostering of interest in learning ophthalmoscopy, reflected by increased practice time. To compare results of simulator-based vs traditional training of medical students in direct ophthalmoscopy. Randomized controlled trial. First-year medical student volunteers completed 1 hour of didactic instruction regarding direct ophthalmoscopes, fundus anatomy, and signs of disease. Students were randomized to an additional hour of training on a direct ophthalmoscope simulator (n = 17) or supervised practice examining classmates (traditional method, n = 16). After 1 week of independent student practice using assigned training methods, masked ophthalmologist observers assessed student ophthalmoscopy skills (technique, efficiency, and global performance) during examination of 5 patient volunteers, using 5-point Likert scales. Students recorded findings and lesion location for each patient. Two masked ophthalmologists graded answer sheets independently using 3-point scales. Students completed surveys before randomization and after assessments. Training groups were compared for grades, observer- and patient-assigned scores, and survey responses. The simulator group reported longer practice times than the traditional group (P = .002). Observers assigned higher technique scores to the simulator group after adjustment for practice time (P = .034). Combined grades (maximum points = 20) were higher for the simulator group (median: 5.0, range: 0.0-11.0) than for the traditional group (median: 4.0, range: 0.0-9.0), although the difference was not significant. The simulator group was less likely to mistake the location of a macular scar in 1 patient (odds ratio: 0.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.056-1.35, P = .013). Direct ophthalmoscopy is difficult, regardless of training technique, but simulator-based training has apparent advantages, including improved technique, the ability to localize fundus lesions, and a fostering of interest in learning ophthalmoscopy, reflected by increased practice time.

Topics & Concepts