Board #140 - Research Abstract Factors Related to Paramedic Program Interprofessional Simulation (Submission #8262)

Abstract

Hypothesis Interprofessional education promotes collaborative practice, enhances interdisciplinary communication and improves patient safety.1-3 Barriers to simulation in nursing include faculty training, cost, equipment issues, personnel resources, scheduling, and curricular issues.4 Interprofessional simulation has additional challenges such as scheduling, class size, program proximity, administrative buy-in, faculty resistance, regulatory limitations and scope of practice boundaries.1 Nothing has been published regarding the relationship between interdisciplinary simulation education and faculty training, resources or faculty perceptions in paramedic programs. The objective of this study is to describe the simulation resources that accredited paramedic programs have, which of those resources paramedic programs actually use, how simulation is used, faculty perceptions about simulation, and the effects of faculty training and faculty resources on the use of simulation. Methods In the Simulation Use in Paramedic Education Research (SUPER) project, the the National Association of EMS Educators conducted a census survey of all paramedic programs in the U.S. that were accredited, or had a letter of review from the Committee on Accreditation of Educational Programs for the Emergency Medical Services Professions (CoAEMSP) effective through November of 2013. All respondents were asked to characterize the use of simulation in in order to target educational initiatives and resources. Respondents were also asked if paramedic students participated in simulation-related activities with students or practitioners in other disciplines. Characteristics of programs who participated in interdisciplinary simulation were compared to those who did not. Results There were 389 of 638 programs responding to the survey (61%). Of the 362 replying to the interprofessional simulation questions, 159 (44%) report simulation activities with other disciplines. These programs responded that they used the right amount of simulation more frequently than others X2 (1, N=362) = 8.425, p<.01. There was a difference in personnel support for simulation X2 (1, N=278) = 11.751, p=0.001 in programs participating in interprofessional simulation than in those who did not. These programs indicated their simulation equipment was adequate more often X2 (1, N=356) = 8.838, p<.01 and they more frequently use advanced manikins X2 (1, N=362) = 4.704, p<.05, computer-based simulation X2 (1, N=362) = 11.508 p=.001, and virtual reality simulation X2 (1, N=362) = 5.495, p<.05. Interdisciplinary simulation programs differed from those who did not when reporting that faculty training was adequate X2 (1, N=359) = 12.595, p<0.001. Conclusion This research suggests that paramedic programs involved in interdisciplinary simulation have greater access to resources and faculty training to support simulation. It is unclear if these factors are associated with the greater satisfaction they report regarding the amount of simulation used in their programs. This study does not answer whether paramedic programs participate in interprofessional activities more frequently because of the training and personnel resources they have, or if such participation facilitates their access to these resources.