Peers versus Pros: Feedback using standards in simulation training

Abstract

Creating and updating expert performance-based standards for simulators is labor intensive and requires the regular availability of expert surgeons. We investigated how peer performance based standards compare to expert performance based standards. One hundred medical students took part in a four-session laparoscopic basic skills simulator training course. Performance for the FLS videotrainer tasks were compared between students who received feedback based on either peer standards, expert standards or no feedback at all (control group). No difference in performance between our feedback groups was found. Compared to the control group, they were 18-36% faster but made 52% more errors for tasks on the FLS video trainer (U range [93.5-957], average p < .01). We demonstrated that feedback based on peer standards is equally effective as feedback based on expert standards. The found trade-off between speed and error is not desirable and warrants further investigation.