Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T21:16:27.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Becoming virtually real: using the Virtual Environment for Radiotherapy Training (VERT™) platform for the summative assessment of performance in a palliative radiotherapy treatment technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2022

Andrew Williams Open the ORCID record for Andrew Williams [Opens in a new window]  and
Shelley Blane Open the ORCID record for Shelley Blane [Opens in a new window]
Andrew Williams*
Affiliation:
AECC University College, Bournemouth, UK
Shelley Blane
Affiliation:
AECC University College, Bournemouth, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Andrew Williams, AECC University College, Parkwood Campus, Parkwood Rd., Bournemouth BH5 2DF, UK. E-mail: awilliams@aecc.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Direct observation in the radiotherapy clinic remains the primary method for the assessment of procedural skills. But with increasing automation and reductions in clinical placement time during the recent pandemic, the role of summative, simulation-based assessment is being revisited. The aim of this article is to share early experiences of using Virtual Environment for Radiotherapy Training (VERT) in the assessment of a palliative, parallel pair, external beam treatment delivery technique in a new pre-registration undergraduate programme.

Methods:

Eight first-year students completed a campus-based individual virtual assessment using virtual patient plans representing metastatic disease in the brain and pelvis and late-stage primary lung tumours. Performance was logged on a 25-item checklist for pre and post-procedure checks and treatment delivery tasks.

Results:

All eight students participated in the assessment with seven students (87·5%) achieving a pass grade at first attempt. The course team observed that participants demonstrated a range of skills and abilities and were able to compare and contrast individual approaches to patient positioning. Specific feed-forward action points were also highlighted as areas for students’ to focus on during their second placement. The project also identified logistical benefits for assessment teams.

Conclusions:

While these experiences are a single snapshot, a VERT simulation-based summative assessment is feasible and identified benefits included controlled observation and structured feedback on individual performance and scheduling pressure reductions for clinical teams. However, more work is needed to determine the psychometric qualities and predictability of performance in more complex techniques.

Keywords

clinical assessmentprocedural skillsradiotherapysimulation based assessment (SBA)simulation based education (SBE)virtual environment for radiotherapy training (VERT)
Type
Educational Note
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 22 , 2023 , e38
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

McKinley, R K, Strand, J, Ward, L, Gray, T, Alun-Jones, T, Miller, H. Checklists for assessment and certification of clinical procedural skills omit essential competencies: a systematic review. Med Educ 2008; 42 (4): 338–349.Google ScholarPubMed
Epstein, R M, Hundert, E M. Defining and assessing professional competence. J Am Med Assoc 2002; 287 (2): 226–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sidhu, R S, Grober, E D, Musselman, L J, Reznick, R K. Assessing competency in surgery: where to begin? Surgery 2004; 135 (1): 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G E. The assessment of clinical skills, competence and performance. Acad Med 1990; 65 (9): S63–S67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lozano, R G. A review of literature: learning conditions of radiation therapists. Radiat Ther 2012; 21 (1): 1–11.Google Scholar
Mazur, L M, Marks, L B, McLeod, R et al. Promoting safety mindfulness: Recommendations for the design and use of simulation-based training in radiation therapy. Adv Radiat Oncol 2018; 3 (2): 197–204.Google ScholarPubMed
Siddaiah-Subramanya, M, Smith, S, Lonie, J. Mastery learning: how is it helpful? An analytical review. Adv Med Educ Pract 2017; 8: 269–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGaghie, W C, Barsuk, J H, Wayne, D B. The promise and challenge of mastery learning. Adv Med Educ Pract 2017; 8: 393–394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bridge, P, Giles, E, Williams, A, Boejen, A, Appleyard, R, Kirby, M. International audit of virtual environment for radiotherapy training usage. J Radiother Pract 2017; 16 (4): 375–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridge, P. Simulation-based education international collaboration and resource sharing in response to COVID-19. Malta J Health Sci. 2021. doi: 10.14614/SIMULATIONEDUC/8/21 Google Scholar
Wertz, C I, Wagner, J, Ward, T M, Mickelsen, W. Using simulation in radiographic science education. In Qian, Y (ed.). Teaching, Learning, and Leading With Computer Simulations. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2020: 37–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jimenez, Y A, Hansen, C R, Juneja, P, Thwaites, D I. Successful implementation of Virtual Environment for Radiotherapy Training (VERT) in medical physics education: the University of Sydney’s initial experience and recommendations. Phys Eng Sci Med 2017; 40 (4): 909–916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leong, A, Herst, P, Kane, P. VERT, a virtual clinical environment, enhances understanding of radiation therapy planning concepts. J Med Radiat Sci 2018; 65 (2): 97–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appleyard, R, Coleman, L. Virtual Environment for Radiotherapy Training (VERT) Final Project Report–Executive Summary. London: Department of Health for England, Cancer Action Team, Society and College of Radiographers, 2010.Google Scholar
Green, D, Appleyard, R. The influence of VERT™ characteristics on the development of skills in skin apposition techniques. Radiography 2011; 17 (3): 178–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flinton, D. Competency based assessment using a virtual environment for radiotherapy. Procedia Comput Sci 2013; 25: 399–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srinivasan, M, Hwang, J C, West, D, Yellowlees, P M. Assessment of clinical skills using simulator technologies. Acad Psychiatry 2006; 30 (6): 505–515.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lammers, R L, Davenport, M, Korley, F et al. Teaching and assessing procedural skills using simulation: metrics and methodology. Acad Emerg Med 2008; 15 (11): 1079–1087.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gulikers, J T, Bastiaens, T J, Kirschner, P A. A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educ Technol Res Dev 2004; 52 (3): 67–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association for Simulated Practice in Healthcare. http://aspih.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/standards-framework.pdf. Published 2016. Accessed September 10, 2021.Google Scholar
Holmboe, E S, Iobst, W I. The Assessment Guidebook. Chicago, IL: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, 2020.Google Scholar
Holmboe, E, Rizzolo, M A, Sachdeva, A K, Rosenberg, M, Ziv, A. Simulation-based assessment and the regulation of healthcare professionals. Simul Healthcare 2011; 6 (7): S58–S62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Williams and Blane supplementary material

Williams and Blane supplementary material

Download Williams and Blane supplementary material(File)
File 18.4 KB