# Preparing Medical Students for Sideline Sports Care in Underserved Communities: A Comparison of Simulation and Lecture-Based Training

## TL;DR

This study compares simulation and lecture-based training for medical students preparing to provide sports care in underserved communities, finding that simulation boosts confidence more effectively.

## Contribution

The study introduces a novel comparison of training methods for medical students in community-based sports care, emphasizing simulation's role in confidence and equity-driven education.

## Key findings

- Simulation-based training increased confidence more than lectures (33.06% vs. 24.53%).
- Resident physician involvement was highly valued by 80.6% of simulation participants.
- Both training methods significantly improved confidence, but knowledge gains were not significantly different.

## Abstract

Introduction: Access to sideline medical care is limited in many public-school athletic programs, especially in underserved urban areas. The Detroit Public School Health Corps (DPSHC) was founded in response to the tragic death of a Detroit public school basketball player who suffered a cardiac arrest during a game, underscoring the critical need for timely and effective sideline emergency care. DPSHC is a student-led inreach initiative targeting local healthcare gaps by providing equity-driven medical training in nearby schools. This study tests the hypothesis that simulation-based training will be more effective than traditional didactic training in improving a student volunteer’s clinical preparedness, knowledge retention, and confidence in sideline medical roles. The primary objectives are to compare confidence and knowledge gains between the two training methods, while a secondary objective evaluates the perceived impact of resident physician involvement during simulation.

Methods: Forty-seven medical student volunteers completed either lecture-based (n=16) or simulation-based (n=31) training. Both groups completed identical pre- and post-training surveys assessing confidence in managing sports injuries and clinical knowledge. Paired t-tests analyzed the data to evaluate within-group improvements from before to after a training session, while independent t-tests compared the degree of improvement between training formats.

Results: Both groups showed a significant improvement in confidence (p < 0.001). The simulation group showed greater confidence gains than the lecture group (33.06% vs. 24.53%, p = 0.02). Knowledge scores improved more in the simulation group (62.1% vs. 31.25%), though not significantly (p = 0.153). Resident physician involvement was rated invaluable by 25 (80.6%) of the simulation participants.

Conclusion: Simulation-based training enhanced medical student volunteers’ confidence more than lecture-based methods in sideline care roles within an inreach program addressing healthcare disparities. These findings support the expansion of simulation-based learning as a core component of equity-driven, community-embedded medical education.