Hazards and incidents: Detection and learning in radiation medicine, a comparison of 2 educational interventions

Abstract

PurposeInterprofessional, educational live simulations were compared with group discussion–based exercises in terms of their ability to improve radiation medicine trainees’ ability to detect hazards and incidents and understand behaviors that may prevent them. Methods and materialsTrainees and recent graduates of radiation therapy, medical physics, and radiation oncology programs were recruited and randomized to either a simulation-based or group discussion–based training intervention. Participants engaged in hazard and incident detection, analysis, and a discussion of potential preventive measures and the concept of the “highly reliable team.” A video examination tool modeled on actual incidents, using 5-minute videos created by faculty, students, and volunteers, was created to test hazard and incident recognition ability before and after training. Hazard and incident detection sensitivity and specificity analyses were conducted, and a survey of the participants’ and facilitators’ perceptions was conducted. ResultsTwenty-seven participants were assigned to the simulation (n = 15) or discussion group (n = 12). Hazard and incident-detection sensitivity ranged from 0.04 to 0.56 before and 0.04 to 0.35 after training for the discussion and simulation groups, respectively. The pre- and posttraining difference in sensitivity between groups was 0.03 (P = .75) for the minimum and 0.33 (P = .034) for the maximum reaction time. Participant perceptions of the training’s educational value in a variety of domains ranged from a mean score of 6.58 to 8.17 and 7 to 8.07 for the discussion and simulation groups, respectively. Differences were not statistically significant. Twenty-six of the 27 participants indicated that they would recommend this event to a colleague. ConclusionsParticipants’ ability to detect hazards and incidents as portrayed in 5-minute videos in this study was low both before and after training, and simulation-based training was not superior to discussion–based training. However, levels of satisfaction and perceptions of the training’s educational value were high, especially with simulation-based training.