# A pilot study to understand faculty and student needs for undergraduate medical education simulation sequencing in the United Arab Emirates

## TL;DR

This study explores how medical schools in the UAE plan simulation sessions and finds that poor sequencing and lack of preparation hinder effective learning.

## Contribution

The study identifies gaps in simulation sequencing and collaboration in UAE medical education through surveys of faculty and students.

## Key findings

- Only 33.3% of faculty reported prior planning for simulation sequencing.
- Just 14.2% of faculty selected simulation topics based on curriculum gaps.
- Only 18.2% of students completed required pre-session knowledge.

## Abstract

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended.

Introduction: The use of simulation-based education in undergraduate medical education has many advantages. Purposeful planning of the sequence of simulation sessions within the curriculum is necessary for complex simulation exercises. This requires pre-session completion of prerequisite knowledge.

Methods: Two surveys were conducted. An electronic survey was sent to faculty involved in simulation at UAE medical schools (n=29). The faculty survey addressed the simulation sessions planning process, sequencing of simulation topics, and institutional simulation team structure. The second survey was administered via paper to final year medical students from Dubai Medical College (DMC) who received simulation sessions (n=22). The survey addressed completion of prerequisite knowledge, receipt of the session objectives, and psychological safety and overall session ratings. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively. Responses to open ended questions were analyzed thematically.

Results: The faculty response rate was (21/29: 72.4%). Only (7/21: 33.3%) faculty members indicated there was prior planning to ensure proper sequencing within the curriculum. Only (3/21: 14.2%) indicated that simulation topics were chosen based on curriculum gaps. A small percentage (3/21: 14.2%) reported working with other faculty and an instructional designer. Qualitative themes included barriers to planning, structural considerations, and factors for successful simulation integration.

The student response rate was 100%. Only (4/22:18.2%) of students completed the required pre-session prerequisite knowledge. Most students (18/22: 81.8%) received the session objectives prior to the simulation session. Qualitative themes included lack of completion of pre-requisite knowledge prior to the session, absence of learning objectives, and technical issues.

Conclusion: This study highlights the gap in adequate sequencing of complex simulation scenarios within the curriculum. This is mainly due to the lack of completion of the required prerequisite knowledge prior to the session. Such complex integration requires adequate planning and collaboration of the simulation team with key stakeholders including faculty, the curriculum committee, and instructional designers.