• Mariana Ferrandini Price, Damián Escribano Tortosa, Antonio Nieto Fernandez-Pacheco, Nuria Perez Alonso, José Joaquín Cerón Madrigal, Rafael Melendreras-Ruiz, Ángel Joaquín García-Collado, Manuel Pardo Rios, and Laura Juguera Rodriguez.
• Doctoral Program in Health Sciences, Catholic University of Murcia (UCAM), Spain.
• Nurse Educ Today. 2018 Dec 1; 71: 48-53.

ObjectivesThe main objective of the study is to determine the efficiency in the execution of the START (Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment) triage, comparing Virtual Reality (VR) to Clinical Simulation (CS) in a Mass Casualty Incident (MCI). The secondary objective is to determine the stress produced in the health professionals in the two situations described.MaterialsA comparative study on the efficiency and the stress during triage in a MSI was conducted. The basal and post levels of salivary α-amylase (sAA) activity were measured in all the participants before and after the simulation.ResultsThe percentage of victims that were triaged correctly was 87.65% (SD = 8.3); 88.3% (SD = 9.65) for the Clinical Simulation with Actors (CSA) group and 87.2% (SD = 7.2) for the Virtual Reality Simulation (VRG) group, without any significant differences (p = 0.612) between both groups. The basal sAA was 103.26 (SD = 79.13) U/L with a significant increase (p < 0.001) with respect to the post-simulation levels (182.22, SD = 148.65 U/L). The increase of sAA was 80.70 (SD = 109.67) U/mL, being greater for the CSA group than the VRG group.ConclusionThe results show that virtual reality method is as efficient as clinical simulation for training on the execution of basic triage (START model). Also, based on the sAA results, we can attest that clinical simulation creates a more stressful training experience for the student, so that is should not be substituted by the use of virtual reality, although the latter could be used as a complementary activity.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

16 keywords...

hide…