• Kenneth Hee King Lee, Hugh Grantham, and Russell Boyd.
• Intensive Care Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, South Australia, Australia. kenneth.lee2@health.sa.gov.au
• Emerg Med Australas. 2008 Dec 1;20(6):508-14.

ObjectiveA pilot study exploring the differences between high- and low-fidelity mannequins in the assessment of clinical performance.MethodsStandardized clinical scenarios were used to test 12 intensive care paramedics (ICP). Each ICP was randomly assigned to a scenario using either a high-fidelity (SimMan) or low-fidelity mannequin (Laerdal Heart Start 2000), followed by a crossover assessment using the alternative scenario. We examined both the objective and subjective outcomes. Objective performance was assessed by three independent assessors, all accredited Advanced Paediatric Life Support instructors. Subjective outcomes were measured by assessment questionnaires and a rating scale.ResultsThe overall proportion that passed the high-fidelity mannequin scenario was 0.47 compared with 0.58 in the low-fidelity mannequin scenario. The difference was -0.11 (95% CI -0.32-0.11). The subjective outcomes were charted and presented within the article. The ICP preferred the use of high-fidelity mannequin for assessment purpose.ConclusionThere was no significant objective difference between the two mannequins.

13 keywords...

hide…