Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Does simulation training in final year make new...

Electronic data

  • BMJ_STEL_Current_version_LB

    Rights statement: This article has been accepted for publication in BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning 2021 following peer review, and the Version of Record can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836 © Authors (or their employer(s)) OR © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd” ( for assignments of BMJ Case Reports)

    Accepted author manuscript, 218 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice?

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice? / Carpenter, Ciara; Keegan, Thomas; Vince, Gill et al.
In: BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 7, No. 6, 31.07.2021, p. 510-516.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Carpenter C, Keegan T, Vince G, Brewster L. Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice? BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning. 2021 Jul 31;7(6):510-516. Epub 2021 Jul 26. doi: 10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836

Author

Carpenter, Ciara ; Keegan, Thomas ; Vince, Gill et al. / Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice?. In: BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning. 2021 ; Vol. 7, No. 6. pp. 510-516.

Bibtex

@article{aaed9a78fe5a409c81df928ad32d99bc,
title = "Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice?",
abstract = "Introduction - The transition from medical student to doctor has long been a source of concern, with widespread reporting of new graduates{\textquoteright} lack of preparedness for medical practice. Simulation has been suggested as a way to improve preparedness, particularly due to the difficulties in allowing full autonomy for patient care for undergraduate medical students. Few studies look at simulation alone for this purpose, and no studies have compared different simulation formats to assess their impact on preparedness.Methods - This mixed-method study looked at two different simulation courses in two UK universities. Data were collected in two phases: immediately after the simulation and 3–4 months into the same students{\textquoteright} postgraduate training. Questionnaires provided quantitative data measuring preparedness and interviews provided a more in-depth analysis of experiential learning across final year and how this contributed to preparedness.Results - There were no significant differences between the two courses for overall preparedness, stress or views on simulation, and no significant differences in opinions longitudinally. Although the study initially set out to look at simulation alone, emergent qualitative findings emphasised experiential learning as key in both clinical and simulated settings. This inter-relationship between simulation and the student assistantship prepared students for practice. Longitudinally, the emphasis on experiential learning in simulation was maintained and participants demonstrated using skills they had practised in simulation in their daily practice as doctors. Nevertheless, there was evidence that although students felt prepared, they were still scared about facing certain scenarios as foundation doctors.Discussion - The results of this study suggest that simulation may positively affect students{\textquoteright} preparedness for practice as doctors. Simulation will never be a replacement for real clinical experience. However, when used prior to and alongside clinical experience, it may have positive effects on new doctors{\textquoteright} confidence and competence, and, therefore, positively impact patient care.",
author = "Ciara Carpenter and Thomas Keegan and Gill Vince and Liz Brewster",
note = "This article has been accepted for publication in BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning 2021 following peer review, and the Version of Record can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836 {\textcopyright} Authors (or their employer(s)) OR {\textcopyright} BMJ Publishing Group Ltd” ( for assignments of BMJ Case Reports) ",
year = "2021",
month = jul,
day = "31",
doi = "10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "510--516",
journal = "BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning",
issn = "2056-6697",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does simulation training in final year make new graduates feel more prepared for the realities of professional practice?

AU - Carpenter, Ciara

AU - Keegan, Thomas

AU - Vince, Gill

AU - Brewster, Liz

N1 - This article has been accepted for publication in BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning 2021 following peer review, and the Version of Record can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836 © Authors (or their employer(s)) OR © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd” ( for assignments of BMJ Case Reports)

PY - 2021/7/31

Y1 - 2021/7/31

N2 - Introduction - The transition from medical student to doctor has long been a source of concern, with widespread reporting of new graduates’ lack of preparedness for medical practice. Simulation has been suggested as a way to improve preparedness, particularly due to the difficulties in allowing full autonomy for patient care for undergraduate medical students. Few studies look at simulation alone for this purpose, and no studies have compared different simulation formats to assess their impact on preparedness.Methods - This mixed-method study looked at two different simulation courses in two UK universities. Data were collected in two phases: immediately after the simulation and 3–4 months into the same students’ postgraduate training. Questionnaires provided quantitative data measuring preparedness and interviews provided a more in-depth analysis of experiential learning across final year and how this contributed to preparedness.Results - There were no significant differences between the two courses for overall preparedness, stress or views on simulation, and no significant differences in opinions longitudinally. Although the study initially set out to look at simulation alone, emergent qualitative findings emphasised experiential learning as key in both clinical and simulated settings. This inter-relationship between simulation and the student assistantship prepared students for practice. Longitudinally, the emphasis on experiential learning in simulation was maintained and participants demonstrated using skills they had practised in simulation in their daily practice as doctors. Nevertheless, there was evidence that although students felt prepared, they were still scared about facing certain scenarios as foundation doctors.Discussion - The results of this study suggest that simulation may positively affect students’ preparedness for practice as doctors. Simulation will never be a replacement for real clinical experience. However, when used prior to and alongside clinical experience, it may have positive effects on new doctors’ confidence and competence, and, therefore, positively impact patient care.

AB - Introduction - The transition from medical student to doctor has long been a source of concern, with widespread reporting of new graduates’ lack of preparedness for medical practice. Simulation has been suggested as a way to improve preparedness, particularly due to the difficulties in allowing full autonomy for patient care for undergraduate medical students. Few studies look at simulation alone for this purpose, and no studies have compared different simulation formats to assess their impact on preparedness.Methods - This mixed-method study looked at two different simulation courses in two UK universities. Data were collected in two phases: immediately after the simulation and 3–4 months into the same students’ postgraduate training. Questionnaires provided quantitative data measuring preparedness and interviews provided a more in-depth analysis of experiential learning across final year and how this contributed to preparedness.Results - There were no significant differences between the two courses for overall preparedness, stress or views on simulation, and no significant differences in opinions longitudinally. Although the study initially set out to look at simulation alone, emergent qualitative findings emphasised experiential learning as key in both clinical and simulated settings. This inter-relationship between simulation and the student assistantship prepared students for practice. Longitudinally, the emphasis on experiential learning in simulation was maintained and participants demonstrated using skills they had practised in simulation in their daily practice as doctors. Nevertheless, there was evidence that although students felt prepared, they were still scared about facing certain scenarios as foundation doctors.Discussion - The results of this study suggest that simulation may positively affect students’ preparedness for practice as doctors. Simulation will never be a replacement for real clinical experience. However, when used prior to and alongside clinical experience, it may have positive effects on new doctors’ confidence and competence, and, therefore, positively impact patient care.

U2 - 10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836

DO - 10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000836

M3 - Journal article

VL - 7

SP - 510

EP - 516

JO - BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning

JF - BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning

SN - 2056-6697

IS - 6

ER -