Simulation in a disaster drill: comparison of high-fidelity simulators versus trained actors

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Emergency Medicine
• Simulation Technology

Background:

• High-fidelity patient simulation offers realistic medical scenarios with stressors.
• Mass casualty drills require realistic incidents to test provider and institutional resource management.
• This study compares high-fidelity simulated patients to live actor-patients in drills.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the effectiveness of high-fidelity simulated patients versus live actor-patients in mass casualty drills.
• To assess the impact of simulators on the perceived realism of mass casualty drills.
• To evaluate critical action completion rates using both simulation methods.

Main Methods:

• A prospective cohort study during two mass casualty drills (December 2006, March 2007).
• Comparison of critical action completion between live actor-patients and simulators.
• Post-test surveys assessed participant perception of "reality" and training value.

Main Results:

• Victim injuries included burn, blast, or inhalation trauma (n=130).
• Critical action miss rate was low and equivalent: 0.74% for simulators and live actors.
• Over 96% of participants would recommend simulators; they heightened realism, accurately represented disease states, and improved patient assessment/treatment realism.

Conclusions:

• High-fidelity simulators are equivalent to live actors in prompting critical actions during mass casualty drills.
• Simulators enhance the perceived realism and training value of mass casualty drills.
• Simulators are a valuable tool for medical training in high-stress, mass casualty scenarios.