Interval versus Massed Training: How Do We Best Teach Surgery?

Abstract

Objectives:

1) Compare two training paradigms, massed vs. interval training, when novice students learn to perform myringotomy with ventilation tube insertion (MVTI) on a validated simulator. 2) Determine if training paradigm affected confidence levels performing the procedure and comfort level working under a microscope.

Methods:

Between September 2011 and April 2012, 40 medical students were randomized to the interval group (n=19), in which they were trained to perform MVTI in five practice trials/day over 3 days, or the massed group (n=21) in which they were trained over 15 practice trials in one sitting. One week later, all students were tested in five final trials. Outcome measures included time to complete the operation and number and type of error made. Pre- and post-test surveys were administered.

Results:

Students in both groups demonstrated a significant decrease in time between practice and final trials. There was no significant difference between the two groups in time to complete their final trials. No difference was observed in the number of errors committed per trial between practice and final trials (both groups) or between massed and interval groups in their final trials. Students in both groups showed significantly increased confidence in conducting the procedure and in using a microscope. In the final trials, participants in the interval group felt significantly more confident about their ability to perform the procedure than those in the massed group.

Conclusions:

Training method had little impact on proficiency in performing a simulated surgical procedure in this setting.