Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 241

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Simulation-based Training Improves Physicians' Performance in Patient Care in High-stakes Clinical Setting of Cardiac Surgery

Open access
Bruppacher, Heinz R., Alam, Syed K., LeBlanc, Vicki R., Latter, David, Naik, Viren N., Savoldelli, Georges L., Mazer, C. David, Kurrek, Matt M., Joo, Hwan S.·2010·Anesthesiology

Abstract

Background: Simulation-based training is useful in improving physicians' skills. However, no randomized controlled trials have been able to demonstrate the effects of simulation teaching in real-life patient care. This study aimed to determine whether simulation-based training or an interactive seminar resulted in better patient care during weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-a high stakes clinical setting. Methods: This study was conducted as a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. After institutional research board approval, 20 anesthesiology trainees, postgraduate year 4 or higher, inexperienced in CPB weaning, and 60 patients scheduled for elective coronary artery bypass grafting were recruited. Each trainee received a teaching syllabus for CPB weaning 1 week before attempting to wean a patient from CPB (pretest). One week later, each trainee received a 2-h training session with either high-fidelity simulation-based training or a 2-h interactive seminar. Each trainee then weaned patients from CPB within 2 weeks (posttest) and 5 weeks (retention test) from the intervention. Clinical performance was measured using the validated Anesthesiologists' Nontechnical Skills Global Rating Scale and a checklist of expected clinical actions. Results: Pretest Global Rating Scale and checklist performances were similar. The simulation group scored significantly higher than the seminar group at both posttest (Global Rating Scale [mean +/- standard error]: 14.3 +/- 0.41 vs. 11.8 +/- 0.41, P < 0.001; checklist: 89.9 +/- 3.0% vs. 75.4 +/- 3.0%, P = 0.003) and retention test (Global Rating Scale: 14.1 +/- 0.41 vs. 11.7 +/- 0.41, P < 0.001; checklist: 93.2 +/- 2.4% vs. 77.0 +/- 2.4%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Skills required to wean a patient from CPB can be acquired through simulation-based training. Compared with traditional interactive seminars, simulation-based training leads to improved performance in patient care by senior trainees in anesthesiology.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aln.0b013e3181d3e31c

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 241

Metadata

Authors
Bruppacher, H. R., Alam, S. K., LeBlanc, V. R., Latter, D., Naik, V. N., Savoldelli, G. L., Mazer, C. D., Kurrek, M. M., & Joo, H. S.
Venue
Anesthesiology
Published
2010-04-01
Volume
112
Issue
4
Pages
985-992
ISSN
0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2029173787
Cited by
241
References
5
FWCI
12.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Simulation-based Training Improves Physicians' Performance in Patient Care in High-stakes Clinical Setting of Cardiac Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/aln.0b013e3181d3e31c
The paper
Bruppacher, H. R., Alam, S. K., LeBlanc, V. R., Latter, D., Naik, V. N., Savoldelli, G. L., Mazer, C. D., Kurrek, M. M., & Joo, H. S. (2010). Simulation-based Training Improves Physicians' Performance in Patient Care in High-stakes Clinical Setting of Cardiac Surgery. Anesthesiology. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0b013e3181d3e31c

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.