1.Targeted screening and profiling of massive components of colistimethate sodium by two-dimensional-liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry based on self-constructed compound database.
Xuan LI ; Minwen HUANG ; Yue-Mei ZHAO ; Wenxin LIU ; Nan HU ; Jie ZHOU ; Zi-Yi WANG ; Sheng TANG ; Jian-Bin PAN ; Hian Kee LEE ; Yao-Zuo YUAN ; Taijun HANG ; Hai-Wei SHI ; Hongyuan CHEN
Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 2025;15(2):101072-101072
In-depth study of the components of polymyxins is the key to controlling the quality of this class of antibiotics. Similarities and variations of components present significant analytical challenges. A two-dimensional (2D) liquid chromatography-mass spectrometr (LC-MS) method was established for screening and comprehensive profiling of compositions of the antibiotic colistimethate sodium (CMS). A high concentration of phosphate buffer mobile phase was used in the first-dimensional LC system to get the components well separated. For efficient and high-accuracy screening of CMS, a targeted method based on a self-constructed high resolution (HR) mass spectrum database of CMS components was established. The database was built based on the commercial MassHunter Personal Compound Database and Library (PCDL) software and its accuracy of the compound matching result was verified with six known components before being applied to genuine sample screening. On this basis, the unknown peaks in the CMS chromatograms were deduced and assigned. The molecular formula, group composition, and origins of a total of 99 compounds, of which the combined area percentage accounted for more than 95% of CMS components, were deduced by this 2D-LC-MS method combined with the MassHunter PCDL. This profiling method was highly efficient and could distinguish hundreds of components within 3 h, providing reliable results for quality control of this kind of complex drugs.
2.Comparison of virtual and in-person simulations for sepsis and trauma resuscitation training in Singapore: a randomized controlled trial
Matthew Jian Wen LOW ; Gene Wai Han CHAN ; Zisheng LI ; Yiwen KOH ; Chi Loong JEN ; Zi Yao LEE ; Lenard Tai Win CHENG
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions 2024;21(1):33-
Purpose:
This study aimed to compare cognitive, non-cognitive, and overall learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation skills in novices with virtual patient simulation (VPS) versus in-person simulation (IPS).
Methods:
A randomized controlled trial was conducted on junior doctors in 1 emergency department from January to December 2022, comparing 70 minutes of VPS (n=19) versus IPS (n=21) in sepsis and trauma resuscitation. Using the nominal group technique, we created skills assessment checklists and determined Bloom’s taxonomy domains for each checklist item. Two blinded raters observed participants leading 1 sepsis and 1 trauma resuscitation simulation. Satisfaction was measured using the Student Satisfaction with Learning Scale (SSLS). The SSLS and checklist scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and 2-tailed t-test respectively.
Results:
For sepsis, there was no significant difference between VPS and IPS in overall scores (2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.4 to 5.4; Cohen’s d=0.38), as well as in items that were cognitive (1.1; 95% CI, -1.5 to 3.7) and not only cognitive (0.9; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.2). Likewise, for trauma, there was no significant difference in overall scores (-0.9; 95% CI, -4.1 to 2.3; Cohen’s d=0.19), as well as in items that were cognitive (-0.3; 95% CI, -2.8 to 2.1) and not only cognitive (-0.6; 95% CI, -2.4 to 1.3). The median SSLS scores were lower with VPS than with IPS (-3.0; 95% CI, -1.0 to -5.0).
Conclusion
For novices, there were no major differences in overall and non-cognitive learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation between VPS and IPS. Learners were more satisfied with IPS than with VPS (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05201950).
3.Comparison of virtual and in-person simulations for sepsis and trauma resuscitation training in Singapore: a randomized controlled trial
Matthew Jian Wen LOW ; Gene Wai Han CHAN ; Zisheng LI ; Yiwen KOH ; Chi Loong JEN ; Zi Yao LEE ; Lenard Tai Win CHENG
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions 2024;21(1):33-
Purpose:
This study aimed to compare cognitive, non-cognitive, and overall learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation skills in novices with virtual patient simulation (VPS) versus in-person simulation (IPS).
Methods:
A randomized controlled trial was conducted on junior doctors in 1 emergency department from January to December 2022, comparing 70 minutes of VPS (n=19) versus IPS (n=21) in sepsis and trauma resuscitation. Using the nominal group technique, we created skills assessment checklists and determined Bloom’s taxonomy domains for each checklist item. Two blinded raters observed participants leading 1 sepsis and 1 trauma resuscitation simulation. Satisfaction was measured using the Student Satisfaction with Learning Scale (SSLS). The SSLS and checklist scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and 2-tailed t-test respectively.
Results:
For sepsis, there was no significant difference between VPS and IPS in overall scores (2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.4 to 5.4; Cohen’s d=0.38), as well as in items that were cognitive (1.1; 95% CI, -1.5 to 3.7) and not only cognitive (0.9; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.2). Likewise, for trauma, there was no significant difference in overall scores (-0.9; 95% CI, -4.1 to 2.3; Cohen’s d=0.19), as well as in items that were cognitive (-0.3; 95% CI, -2.8 to 2.1) and not only cognitive (-0.6; 95% CI, -2.4 to 1.3). The median SSLS scores were lower with VPS than with IPS (-3.0; 95% CI, -1.0 to -5.0).
Conclusion
For novices, there were no major differences in overall and non-cognitive learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation between VPS and IPS. Learners were more satisfied with IPS than with VPS (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05201950).
4.Comparison of virtual and in-person simulations for sepsis and trauma resuscitation training in Singapore: a randomized controlled trial
Matthew Jian Wen LOW ; Gene Wai Han CHAN ; Zisheng LI ; Yiwen KOH ; Chi Loong JEN ; Zi Yao LEE ; Lenard Tai Win CHENG
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions 2024;21(1):33-
Purpose:
This study aimed to compare cognitive, non-cognitive, and overall learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation skills in novices with virtual patient simulation (VPS) versus in-person simulation (IPS).
Methods:
A randomized controlled trial was conducted on junior doctors in 1 emergency department from January to December 2022, comparing 70 minutes of VPS (n=19) versus IPS (n=21) in sepsis and trauma resuscitation. Using the nominal group technique, we created skills assessment checklists and determined Bloom’s taxonomy domains for each checklist item. Two blinded raters observed participants leading 1 sepsis and 1 trauma resuscitation simulation. Satisfaction was measured using the Student Satisfaction with Learning Scale (SSLS). The SSLS and checklist scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and 2-tailed t-test respectively.
Results:
For sepsis, there was no significant difference between VPS and IPS in overall scores (2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.4 to 5.4; Cohen’s d=0.38), as well as in items that were cognitive (1.1; 95% CI, -1.5 to 3.7) and not only cognitive (0.9; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.2). Likewise, for trauma, there was no significant difference in overall scores (-0.9; 95% CI, -4.1 to 2.3; Cohen’s d=0.19), as well as in items that were cognitive (-0.3; 95% CI, -2.8 to 2.1) and not only cognitive (-0.6; 95% CI, -2.4 to 1.3). The median SSLS scores were lower with VPS than with IPS (-3.0; 95% CI, -1.0 to -5.0).
Conclusion
For novices, there were no major differences in overall and non-cognitive learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation between VPS and IPS. Learners were more satisfied with IPS than with VPS (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05201950).

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail