CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morgan, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cleave-Hogg, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Morgan, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cleave-Hogg, D.
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 48:A53 (2001)
© Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, 2001


Abstracts - Tuesday June 12 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.

COST AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS OF SIMULATOR-BASED EDUCATION

Pamela J. Morgan, MD CCFP FRCPC and Doreen Cleave-Hogg, BA MA PhD

Department of Anesthesia, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Science Centre, University of Toronto, 76 Grenville St. Toronto, Ontario M5S 1B2

INTRODUCTION

Simulator-based education is proving to be a valuable undergraduate educational experience. However, financial and resource implications of this innovation may limit its integration into medical school curricula.

METHODS

Accumulated financial and faculty resource data of simulator-based education and evaluation for the period from July 1997-April 2001 were reviewed and analyzed. Operational costs for upkeep and maintenance of the anesthesia simulator as well as faculty resources required to implement the programs were assessed. An average cost per student was calculated based on a cohort of 10 students per session for a total of 177 students per annum.

RESULTS

Table 1Go outlines the operational costs for education or assessment purposes in the undergraduate program. Table 2Go summarizes the faculty costs for an educational program. Faculty costs would increase to 324 hours if used as an evaluation tool to accommodate two raters ($1.83 per student).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 1: Estimation of Operational Costs
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 2: Faculty Resource Implications
 
DISCUSSION

The financial and resource cost per student appears high. The value of the education and the validity and reliability of the assessments, coupled with patient safety will determine the ultimate acceptance of this innovation into undergraduate programs.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morgan, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cleave-Hogg, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Morgan, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cleave-Hogg, D.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS