The Effects of Expert and Augmented Feedback on Learning a Complex Medical Skill

Abstract

Many medical skills are complex due to their requirements for integration of declarative (biomedical) knowledge with perceptual–motor and perceptual–cognitive proficiency. While feedback generally helps learners guide their actions, it is unclear how feedback supports the integration of declarative knowledge with skills. Thus, we investigated the effect of expert and augmented feedback on acquisition and retention of a complex medical skill (acquiring a transthoracic echocardiogram) in a simulation study. We randomly assigned 36 medical undergraduate students to one of three feedback sources: Expert (EF), Augmented visual (HS), and Expert plus Help Screen (EF + HS). Participants practiced until reaching proficiency. Outcome measures (knowledge test and practical skill ratings on a 5-point scale), were gathered at initial acquisition and at retention after 11 days, the time needed to obtain the images and the quality of images obtained. We divided the knowledge test into three topics: names of the images, manipulation of the probe, and anatomy of the heart. At acquisition, immediately after training, EF group participants were faster at obtaining images than participants in the two other groups. On the retention test, there were no group differences for speed of obtaining images, but the EF + HS group scored significantly higher than the other two groups on image quality. Thus, expert feedback best assisted initial acquisition and combined augmented and expert feedback best assisted retention of this complex medical task. Expert assistance reduced learners’ cognitive load during initial practice, helping learners integrate declarative knowledge with physical skills.

Keywords

skill acquisition skill retention medical education transthoracic echocardiogram skill training

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

J. R.

(1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89(4), 369–406.

Anderson

J. R.

Bothell

Byrne

M. D.

Douglass

Lebiere

Qin

(2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1036–1060.

Anderson

J. R.

Fincham

J. M.

(1994). Acquisition of procedural skills from examples. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(6), 1322–1340.

Barsuk

J. H.

Cohen

E. R.

McGaghie

W. C.

Wayne

D. B.

(2010). Long-term retention of central venous catheter insertion skills after simulation-based mastery learning. Academic Medicine, 85(10), S9–S12.

Cecilio-Fernandes

Cnossen

Jaarsma

A. D. C.

Tio

R. A.

(2018). Avoiding surgical skill decay: A systematic review on the spacing of training sessions. Journal of Surgical Education, 75(2), 471–480.

Guadagnoli

M. A.

Lee

T. D.

(2004). Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36(2), 212–224.

Hatala

Cook

D. A.

Zendejas

Hamstra

S. J.

Brydges

(2014). Feedback for simulation-based procedural skills training: A meta-analysis and critical narrative synthesis. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 19(2), 251–272.

Kim

J. W.

Ritter

F. E.

Koubek

R. J.

(2013). An integrated theory for improved skill acquisition and retention in the three stages of learning. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 14(1), 22–37.

Kovacs

A. J.

Buchanan

J. J.

Shea

C. H.

(2009). Bimanual 1:1 with 90° continuous phase: Difficult or easy? Experimental Brain Research, 193, 129−136.

10.

Kovacs

A. J.

Shea

C. H.

(2011). The learning of 90 continuous relative phase with and without lissajous feedback: External and internally generated bimanual coordination. Acta Psychologica, 136(3), 311–320.

11.

Mann

D. T.

Williams

A. M.

Ward

Janelle

C. M.

(2007). Perceptual-cognitive expertise in sport: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 29(4), 457–478.

12.

Marchant

D. C.

Clough

P. J.

Crawshaw

(2007). The effects of attentional focusing strategies on novice dart throwing performance and their task experiences. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 5(3), 291–303.

13.

Moazed

Cohen

E. R.

Furiasse

Singer

Corbridge

T. C.

McGaghie

W. C.

Wayne

D. B.

(2013). Retention of critical care skills after simulation-based mastery learning. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(3), 458–463.

14.

Ranganathan

Newell

K. M.

(2009). Influence of augmented feedback on coordination strategies. Journal of Motor Behavior, 41(4), 317–330.

15.

Salmoni

A. W.

Schmidt

R. A.

Walter

C. B.

(1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 355–386.

16.

Schmidt

R. A.

(1991). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. In Requin

Stelmach

G. E.

(Eds.), Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59–75). Springer.

17.

Sigrist

Rauter

Riener

Wolf

(2013). Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(1), 21–53.

18.

Snodgrass

S. J.

Rivett

D. A.

Robertson

V. J.

Stojanovski

(2010). Real-time feedback improves accuracy of manually applied forces during cervical spine mobilisation. Manual Therapy, 15(1), 19–25.

19.

Sulzenbruck

Heuer

(2011). Type of visual feedback during practice influences the precision of the acquired internal model of a complex visuo-motor transformation. Ergonomics, 54(1), 34–46.

20.

Taatgen

N. A.

Huss

Dickison

Anderson

J. R.

(2008). The acquisition of robust and flexible cognitive skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(3), 548–565.

21.

Taatgen

N. A.

Lee

F. J.

(2003). Production compilation: A simple mechanism to model complex skill acquisition. Human Factors, 45(1), 61–76.

22.

Taylor

(1990). Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, 6(1), 35–39.

23.

Torre

D. M.

Daley

B. J.

Sebastian

J. L.

Elnicki

D. M.

(2006). Overview of current learning theories for medical educators. The American Journal of Medicine, 119(10), 903–907.

24.

Uttal

D. H.

Meadow

N. G.

Tipton

Hand

L. L.

Alden

A. R.

Warren

Newcombe

N. S.

(2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402.

25.

Weidenbach

Wild

Scheer

Muth

Kreutter

Grunst

Berlage

Schneider

(2005). Computer-based training in two-dimensional echocardiography using an echocardiography simulator. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography, 18(4), 362–366.

26.

Wik

Myklebust

Auestad

B. H.

Steen

P. A.

(2002). Retention of basic life support skills 6 months after training with an automated voice advisory manikin system without instructor involvement. Resuscitation, 52(3), 273–279.

27.

Wulf

(2007). Attentional focus and motor learning: A review of 10 years of research. E-Journal Bewegung Und Training, 1(2–3), 1–11.

28.

Wulf

McConnel

Gärtner

Schwarz

(2002). Enhancing the learning of sport skills through external-focus feedback. Journal of Motor Behavior, 34(2), 171–182.

29.

Wulf

Shea

C. H.

(2002). Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(2), 185–211.

30.

Wulf

Shea

C. H.

(2004). Understanding the role of augmented feedback. In Williams

A. M.

Hodges

N. J.

(Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research, theory and practice (pp. 121–144). Routledge.

31.

Wulf

Shea

Lewthwaite

(2010). Motor skill learning and performance: A review of influential factors. Medical Education, 44(1), 75–84.

32.

Wulf

(2007). An external focus of attention enhances golf shot accuracy in beginners and experts. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78(4), 384–389.

33.

Zachry

Wulf

Mercer

Bezodis

(2005). Increased movement accuracy and reduced EMG activity as the result of adopting an external focus of attention. Brain Research Bulletin, 67(4), 304–309.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB