Critical CHD is associated with morbidity and mortality, worsened by delayed diagnosis. Paediatric residents are front-line clinicians, yet identification of congenital CHD remains challenging. Current exposure to cardiology is limited in paediatric resident education. We evaluated the impact of rapid cycle deliberate practice simulation on paediatric residents’ skills, knowledge, and perceived competence to recognise and manage infants with congenital CHD.

We conducted a 6-month pilot study. Interns rotating in paediatric cardiology completed a case scenario assessment during weeks 1 and 4 and participated in paired simulations (traditional debrief and rapid cycle deliberate practice) in weeks 2–4. We assessed interns’ skills during the simulation using a checklist of “cannot miss” tasks. In week 4, they completed a retrospective pre-post knowledge-based survey. We analysed the data using summary statistics and mixed effect linear regression.

A total of 26 interns participated. There was a significant increase in case scenario assessment scores between weeks 1 and 4 (4, interquartile range 3–6 versus 8, interquartile range 6–10; p-value < 0.0001). The percentage of “cannot miss” tasks on the simulation checklist increased from weeks 2 to 3 (73% versus 83%, p-value 0.0263) and from weeks 2–4 (73% versus 92%, p-value 0.0025). The retrospective pre-post survey scores also increased (1.67, interquartile range 1.33–2.17 versus 3.83, interquartile range 3.17–4; p-value < 0.0001).

Rapid cycle deliberate practice simulations resulted in improved recognition and initiation of treatment of simulated infants with congenital CHD among paediatric interns. Future studies will include full implementation of the curriculum and knowledge retention work.

CHD is the most common birth defect type, with one-fourth of patients requiring intervention in the first year of life. Caregiver understanding of CHD may vary. Health literacy may be one factor contributing to this variability.

The study occurred at a large, free-standing children’s hospital. Recruitment occurred at a free-of-charge CHD camp and during outpatient cardiology follow-up visits. The study team revised the CHD Guided Questions Tool from an eighth- to a sixth-grade reading level. Caregivers of children with CHD completed the “Newest Vital Sign” health literacy screen and demographic surveys. Health literacy was categorised as “high” (Newest Vital Sign score 4–6) or “low” (score 0–3). Caregivers were randomised to read either the original or revised Guided Questions Tool and completed a validated survey measuring understandability and actionability of the Guided Questions Tool. Understandability and actionability data analysis used two-sample t-testing, and within demographic group differences in these parameters were assessed via one-way analysis of variance.

Eighty-two caregivers participated who were largely well educated with a high income. The majority (79.3%) of participants scored “high” for health literacy. No differences in understanding (p = 0.43) or actionability (p = 0.11) of the original and revised Guided Questions Tool were noted. There were no socio-economic-based differences in understandability or actionability (p > 0.05). There was a trend towards improved understanding of the revised tool (p = 0.06).

This study demonstrated that readability of the Guided Questions Tool could be improved. Future work is needed to expand the study population and further understand health literacy’s impact on the CHD community.