PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Despite advances in simulator technology, live anaesthetised animals continue to be used as human patient simulators for medical professionals to practice techniques in the management of surgical trauma. This article describes the process of convening a working group of individuals with a professional interest in simulation to discuss the use of live animals and consider if and how they can be replaced in the future.
METHODS: A working group was formed of voluntary attendees to a workshop held at the SESAM 2023 conference. Iterative discussions reflecting on the topic were used to produce statements summarising the working group\'s opinions. The working group determined that live animals are used as human patient simulators due to the presence of accurate and responsive physiology in the presence of bleeding, realistic tissue tactility and an emotional response experienced by the learner due to interaction with the animal. They were unable to reach a consensus on replacement, determining that there is currently no single model which is able to provide all the learning aspects which a live animal model can provide. Several suggestions were made regarding development of technologies and pedagogical change.
CONCLUSIONS: Replacement of live animals in surgical simulation is not straightforward but should be an aspiration, if possible. For the ongoing development of trauma surgical simulation models, it is important to combine the knowledge, skills and perspectives of medical stakeholders and educators, academic researchers and industry experts in producing alternative options to the use of live animal simulators.
METHODS: A working group was formed of voluntary attendees to a workshop held at the SESAM 2023 conference. Iterative discussions reflecting on the topic were used to produce statements summarising the working group\'s opinions. The working group determined that live animals are used as human patient simulators due to the presence of accurate and responsive physiology in the presence of bleeding, realistic tissue tactility and an emotional response experienced by the learner due to interaction with the animal. They were unable to reach a consensus on replacement, determining that there is currently no single model which is able to provide all the learning aspects which a live animal model can provide. Several suggestions were made regarding development of technologies and pedagogical change.
CONCLUSIONS: Replacement of live animals in surgical simulation is not straightforward but should be an aspiration, if possible. For the ongoing development of trauma surgical simulation models, it is important to combine the knowledge, skills and perspectives of medical stakeholders and educators, academic researchers and industry experts in producing alternative options to the use of live animal simulators.
摘要：
背景：尽管模拟器技术取得了进步，活的麻醉动物继续被用作医疗专业人员的人类患者模拟器，以实践手术创伤管理技术。本文介绍了召集对模拟有专业兴趣的个人工作组的过程，以讨论活体动物的使用，并考虑将来是否以及如何替换它们。
方法：由参加SESAM2023年会议的研讨会的自愿参加者组成了一个工作组。关于该主题的迭代讨论用于产生总结工作组意见的声明。工作组确定，由于在存在出血的情况下存在准确且反应灵敏的生理机能，因此将活体动物用作人类患者模拟器，真实的组织触感和学习者由于与动物的互动而经历的情绪反应。他们无法就更换问题达成共识，确定当前没有单个模型能够提供活体动物模型可以提供的所有学习方面。就技术发展和教学变革提出了一些建议。
结论：在手术模拟中替换活体动物并不简单，但应该是一种愿望，如果可能的话。对于正在进行的创伤外科模拟模型的开发，重要的是要结合知识，医疗利益相关者和教育工作者的技能和观点，学术研究人员和行业专家生产替代方案，以使用活体动物模拟器。
方法：由参加SESAM2023年会议的研讨会的自愿参加者组成了一个工作组。关于该主题的迭代讨论用于产生总结工作组意见的声明。工作组确定，由于在存在出血的情况下存在准确且反应灵敏的生理机能，因此将活体动物用作人类患者模拟器，真实的组织触感和学习者由于与动物的互动而经历的情绪反应。他们无法就更换问题达成共识，确定当前没有单个模型能够提供活体动物模型可以提供的所有学习方面。就技术发展和教学变革提出了一些建议。
结论：在手术模拟中替换活体动物并不简单，但应该是一种愿望，如果可能的话。对于正在进行的创伤外科模拟模型的开发，重要的是要结合知识，医疗利益相关者和教育工作者的技能和观点，学术研究人员和行业专家生产替代方案，以使用活体动物模拟器。
