Skill retention efficacy of conventional versus modified Peyton's four-step intravenous access skill training approach

Abstract

Abstract Background: Limited research has explored the impact of skill laboratory (lab) training on skill retention. Aims: This study aimed to assess and compare the effectiveness of skill retention between the modified Peyton’s four-step (MPFS) skill lab training approach and the conventional approach (CA) for intravenous (I.V.) access. This research employed a randomized controlled study design conducted within the Skill Development Unit of a Private Medical College and Hospital. Materials and Methods: Fifty-eight first-year medical students were randomly allocated into two groups. These groups received the MPFS or CA approach in small-sized skill lab training sessions focusing on I.V. access. The teacher-to-student ratio was maintained at 1:8, and the duration of each skill session was meticulously documented. Student performance was video recorded right after the teaching session and again at 3 months. The evaluation of skill effectiveness on both occasions was conducted by an impartial faculty member using a binary checklist. Additionally, feedback from both students and faculty members was collected. Group characteristics were analyzed using the chi-square test, and the outcomes of the groups were compared with the Student t test. A P < 0.05 was deemed to be of statistical significance. Results: The MPFS group consistently achieved significantly higher scores and had more proficient students during both assessment times (12 and 13) compared to the CA group, which had lower scores at both time points (3 and 4). Notably, there was no decline in skill proficiency within either group at the 3-month mark. The CA group expressed their appreciation for the chance to demonstrate independent performance, while the MPFS group placed value on receiving feedback and undergoing repeated observations. It is worth noting that both training approaches were manageable for faculty; however, the MPFS approach necessitated more time compared to the CA approach. Conclusion: The MPFS approach outperformed the CA method in acquiring I.V. access skills immediately after training and at the 3-month follow-up.