Show simple item record

Design and evaluation of a subcutaneous contraceptive implant training simulator

dc.contributor.authorDery, Samuel K.K.
dc.contributor.authorKaufmann, Elsie E.
dc.contributor.authorMarzano, David
dc.contributor.authorDeininger, Michael
dc.contributor.authorAsem, Charity K.
dc.contributor.authorSienko, Kathleen H.
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-30T15:32:07Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_14_MONTHS
dc.date.available2019-09-30T15:32:07Z
dc.date.issued2019-10
dc.identifier.citationDery, Samuel K.K.; Kaufmann, Elsie E.; Marzano, David; Deininger, Michael; Asem, Charity K.; Sienko, Kathleen H. (2019). "Design and evaluation of a subcutaneous contraceptive implant training simulator." International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 147(1): 36-42.
dc.identifier.issn0020-7292
dc.identifier.issn1879-3479
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/151337
dc.description.abstractObjectiveTo design and fabricate a subcutaneous contraceptive implant insertion simulator, and to characterize the performance of nursing students trained with and without the simulator.MethodA cross‐sectional study was conducted on nursing students in Ghana who had no previous training in the insertion of contraceptive implants. They were given standardized training in insertion of implants from 25 April to 26 April, 2016, and then were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. The control group watched insertions of live implants while the intervention group practiced using the simulator. Local materials were used to fabricate the simulator. The performance of both groups was assessed after the training.ResultsThe participants consisted of 50 nursing students. Those in the intervention group were more likely to: insert the implant accurately (95.2% vs 78.4%, P<0.001); take less time to complete an insertion (mean of 33.6 seconds vs 42.2 seconds, P<0.001); and commit fewer errors (1.9 vs 2.5, P=0.005) compared to the control group. In addition, participants rated the simulator high on 11/11 of the product requirements with the teaching (93.2%), learning (91.4%), and skill acquisition (88.6%) requirements being the highest rated.ConclusionA low‐cost, locally fabricated simulator is an effective tool for augmenting the current training protocol by improving insertion skills of contraceptive implants.Novices trained with the implant insertion simulator were able to perform error‐free simulated insertions more accurately and quickly compared with the current mode of training.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.publisherWHO
dc.subject.otherNovice
dc.subject.otherCommunity health nurses
dc.subject.otherContraceptive implant
dc.subject.otherFamily planning
dc.subject.otherNexplanon
dc.subject.otherImplanon
dc.subject.otherGhana
dc.subject.otherSimulation
dc.titleDesign and evaluation of a subcutaneous contraceptive implant training simulator
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelObstetrics and Gynecology
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151337/1/ijgo12896_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151337/2/ijgo12896.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ijgo.12896
dc.identifier.sourceInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDieter GE, Schmidt LC. Engineering Design, 5th edn. New York, USA: McGraw‐Hill; 2013: 196 – 261.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGhana Statistical Service, Ghana Health Service, IFC Internnational. Ghana Demographic and Health Survey 2014. Accra, Ghana, 2015.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThe American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Frequently Asked questions: Long‐Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC): IUD and Implant. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 2016. https://www.acog.org/Patients/FAQs/Long-Acting-Reversible-Contraception-LARC-IUD-and-Implant. Accessed July 7, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJacobstein R, Pile JM. Hormonal immplants: Service Delivery Considerations for an Improved and Increasingly Popular Method. 2010. http://www.respond-project.org/pages/files/6_pubs/technical_briefs/Technical-Brief-1-Hormonal-Implants-March2010-final-for-web.pdf. Accessed June 20, 2019.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIsley MM, Edelman A. Contraceptive implants: An overview and update. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2007; 34: 73 – 90.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDuvall S, Thurston S, Weinberger M, et al. Scaling up delivery of contraceptive implants in sub‐Saharan Africa: Operational experiences of Marie Stopes International. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2014; 2: 72 – 92.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceElias B, Hailemariam T. Implants contraceptive utilization and factors associated among married women in the reproductive age group (18‐49 year) in Southern Ethiopia. J Womens Health Care. 2015; 4: 281.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK4Health. Toolkits. The Knowledge for Health (K4Health) Project. https://www.k4health.org/toolkits/implants/jadelle®-implants. Accessed October 20, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCharyeva Z, Oguntunde O, Orobaton N, et al. Task shifting provision of contraceptive implants to community health extension workers: Results of operations research in Northern Nigeria. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2015; 3: 382 – 394.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChin‐quee D, Bratt J, Malkin M, et al. Building on safety, feasibility, and acceptability: The impact and cost of community health worker provision of injectable contraception. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2013; 1: 316 – 327.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKusi‐appouh D, Acquah A, Tapsoba P. The Jagged Road to a Policy Change : Increasing Access to Family Planning using Community Health Nurses. In: UAPS 7th APC Submission. 2015: 1 – 14.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJardin A, Pham MT, Mallet A, et al. A medical simulator for subcutaneous contraceptive implant insertion. Med Eng Phys. 2008; 30: 1134 – 1142.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWorld Health Organization. WHO recommendations: Optimizing health worker roles to improve access to key maternal and newborn health interventions through task shifting. Geneva: WHO; 2012.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTapsoba P, Aboagye PK. Increasing Access to Family Planning in Ghana through Policy Change: Task‐Sharing to Enable Auxiliary Nurses to Provide Contraceptive Implant Services. Ghana, Accra: The Population Council, Inc.; 2014.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePerosky J, Richter R, Rybak O, et al. A low‐cost simulator for learning to manage postpartum hemorrhage in Rural Africa. Simul Healthc. 2011; 6: 42 – 47.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMERCK. Nexplanon Etonogestrel Implant Implanon Medical Training Kit MERCK Program. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nexplanon-Etonogestrel-Implant-Implanon-Medical-Training-Kit-MERCK-Program-/332222076203. Accessed May 3, 2018.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLin Y, Wang X, Wu F, et al. Development and validation of a surgical training simulator with haptic feedback for learning bone‐sawing skill. J Biomed Inform. 2014; 48: 122 – 129.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchubart JR, Erdahl L, Smith JS, et al. Use of breast simulators compared with standardized patients in teaching the clinical breast examination to medical students. J Surg Educ. 2012; 69: 416 – 422.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKhunger N, Kathuria S. Mastering surgical skills through simulation‐based learning: Practice makes one perfect. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2016; 9: 27 – 31.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLateef F. Simulation‐based learning: Just like the real thing. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2010; 3: 348 – 352.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSolymos O, O’Kelly P, Walshe CM. Pilot study comparing simulation‐based and didactic lecture‐based critical care teaching for final‐year medical students. BMC Anesthesiol. 2015; 15: 153.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDodge LE, Hacker MR, Averbach SH, et al. Assessment of a high‐fidelity mobile simulator for intrauterine contraception training in ambulatory reproductive health centres. J Eur CME. 2016; 5: 30416.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.