|M.Sc Student||Rogov Raya|
|Subject||Interactive-Active versus Separate Training in Obstetrics|
|Department||Department of Industrial Engineering and Management||Supervisors||Professor Emeritus Daniel Gopher|
|Professor Ron Tepper|
The study was conducted in Simultech center, located at Clalit's Meir Medical Hospital, which is a training facility for ultrasound competencies. Training in ultrasound interpretation skills, using virtual ultrasound simulations. Our research compared the success of two training formats, in refreshing and enhancing the knowledge bases and diagnostic competencies of ultrasound professionals (experts).
Thus far, the training program in Simultech was divided into three separate and sequential training stages: A tutorial covering all the topics of the day, simulated case-studies which require interactive involvement; And a Phantom Doll exercising manipulation of the ultrasound sensor, using real Ultrasound Machine.
In the proposed alternative training format, task analysis for Sonographers’ skills was performed, as well as the development of an objective entry and final performance test case scenarios. The tests were designed on VIMEDIX (real-time dynamic abdominal ultrasonography simulator) and examined the topics focused on during the training day, before and after the training. The final test case was more difficult and complex than the entrance test case.
Taking into consideration the skill characteristics, trainees level of expertise and the contribution of active learning to information processing, we created an alternative training format. The new interactive-active training format segmented to topics. The study of each topic conducted in three steps. First, a sensor placement exercise, followed by a case study focused on that specific topic trained and concluded review tutorial of the topic. The same sequence is repeated for all included training topics.
Two groups of 10 trainees were compared on the two formats of training. Each trainee performed the entrance test at the beginning of the day, trained in one of the two formats, and performed the final test at the end of the day.
The results show a greater improvement and better performances in the final tests for the group trained with the interactive-active format. The average scores difference between the entrance test and more difficult final test are positive (improvement) in the Interactive-active training and negative (recall that the final case test was more difficult and complex) in the existing separate training.
Following the results and theoretical framework, we propose three main guidelines that a training format for expert trainees should be based on. 1.Focus and separate rather than mix training topics. 2.Add new theoretical information only after active interaction with simulated case problems. This will allow better assimilation and integration with existing knowledge bases. 3.Enhance the relative portion of active and interactive practice to create deeper and stronger effect of memory and performance.