Abstract
Background: Simulation training in medical education is a valuable tool for skill acquisition. Standard audio/video-feedback systems for training surveillance and subsequent video feedback are expensive and often not available.
Methods: We investigated solutions for a low-budget audio/video-feedback system based on consumer hardware and open source software.
Results: Our results indicate that inexpensive, movable network cameras are suitable for high-quality video transmission including bidirectional audio transmission and an integrated streaming platform. In combination with a laptop, a WLAN connection, and the open source software iSpyServer, one or more cameras represent the easiest, yet fully functional audio/video-feedback system. For streaming purposes, the open source software VLC media player yields a comprehensive functionality. Using the powerful VideoLAN Media Manager, it is possible to generate a split-screen video comprising different video and audio streams. Optionally, this system can be augmented by analog audio hardware. In this paper, we present how these different modules can be set up and combined to provide an audio/video-feedback system for a simulation ambulance.
Conclusions: We conclude that open source software and consumer hardware offer the opportunity to build a low-budget, feature-rich and high-quality audio/video-feedback system that can be used in realistic medical simulations.
Acknowledgments
We thank all members of the student group for emergency medicine, Vaya Dimoulatou, the DocLab team, and the physicians of the Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine in Tübingen for their valuable support.
Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of the submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: Financial support for this project came from the “PROFIL” program of the Faculty of Medicine and from the Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Tübingen.
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.
References
1. Pierre MS, Breuer G. Simulation in der medizin. Berlin: Springer, 2013.10.1007/978-3-642-29436-5_20Search in Google Scholar
2. Lippert A, Dieckmann PG, Oestergaard D. Simulation in medicine. Notf Rettungsm 2009;12:49–52.10.1007/s10049-009-1208-zSearch in Google Scholar
3. Maran NJ, Glavin RJ. Low- to high-fidelity simulation – a continuum of medical education? Med Educ 2003;37:22–8.10.1046/j.1365-2923.37.s1.9.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
4. Lorello GR, Cook DA, Johnson RL, Brydges R. Simulation-based training in anaesthesiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2014;112:231–45.10.1093/bja/aet414Search in Google Scholar PubMed
5. Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc 2007;2:115–25.10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539Search in Google Scholar PubMed
6. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, Joo HS, Chow R, Hamstra SJ. Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology 2006;105:279–85.10.1097/00000542-200608000-00010Search in Google Scholar PubMed
7. Small SD, Wuerz RC, Simon R, Shapiro N, Conn A, Setnik G. Demonstration of high-fidelity simulation team training for emergency medicine. Acad Emerg Med 1999;6:312–23.10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb00395.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
Supplemental Material
The online version of this article (DOI: 10.1515/bams-2015-0010) offers supplementary material, available to authorized users.
©2015 by De Gruyter
