June 3, 2025 • 37 mins
Lou Oberndorf's vision transformed healthcare education forever. As founder of Medical Education Technologies (METI), he brought simulation technology from aerospace into medical training when educators were still relying on centuries-old teaching methods. "Medicine has been practicing on us for a thousand years and we're done with it," Lou explains, capturing the revolutionary spirit that drove his pioneering work.
What makes Oberndorf's story fascinating isn't just the technology he championed, but his crucial insight that curriculum development—not just hardware—would determine simulation's success. When nursing educators struggled to integrate these new tools, METI took on the ambitious project of reconstructing entire nursing curricula around simulation opportunities. This comprehensive approach dramatically accelerated adoption across healthcare education, elevating nursing to become a full partner alongside medical schools in simulation-based training.
The journey wasn't without surprises. Oberndorf candidly shares his shock at healthcare's initial resistance to innovation and the delicate balance required between advancing technology and allowing time for meaningful adoption. His current work with Operative Experience continues his lifelong quest for anatomical fidelity—creating simulators that truly look, feel, and respond like human patients for trauma and combat medicine training.
Looking toward the future, Oberndorf believes artificial intelligence will transform every aspect of healthcare simulation while maintaining that hands-on experience remains irreplaceable. His legacy extends beyond the technology itself to the creation of an entire industry and career path for simulation educators who once risked being labeled "career killers" for their forward-thinking approach.
Ready to explore how simulation can transform your healthcare education program? Connect with Innovative Sim Solutions today to discover the powerful world of simulation-based learning that Lou Oberndorf helped pioneer decades ago—technology that continues to save lives by preparing healthcare providers for their most challenging moments.
Innovative SimSolutions.
Your turnkey solution provider for medical simulation programs, sim centers & faculty design.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Disclaimer/ Innovative Sim (00:00):
The views and opinions expressed in
this program are those of thespeakers and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions orpositions of anyone at
Innovative Sim Solutions or oursponsors.
Thanks to Innovative SimSolutions for sponsoring this
week's episode.
Are you a healthcareprofessional or educator looking
to level up your trainingmethods?
(00:20):
Then you need to check out theBasics of Healthcare Simulation,
a dynamic foundational coursedesigned to introduce you to the
powerful world ofsimulation-based learning, from
mannequins to virtual reality.
This class breaks down thetools, techniques and strategies
that bring clinical educationto life safely, effectively and
realistically.
(00:40):
Whether you're brand new tosimulation or just want a
refresher course, this will giveyou the confidence and skills
to create engaging, high-impactlearning experiences.
Ready to revolutionize how toteach and train, reach out to
Deb Tauber at Innovative SimSolutions to set up your
(01:00):
training today.
Welcome to The Sim Cafe, apodcast produced by the team at
Innovative Sim Solutions, editedby Shelly Houser.
Join our host, Deb Tauber, andco-host, Jerrod Jeffries as they
sit down with subject matterexperts from across the globe to
reimagine clinical educationand the use of simulation.
(01:23):
Clinical education and the useof simulation.
So pour yourself a cup ofrelaxation, sit back, tune in
and learn something new from TheSim Cafe.
Deb Tauber (01:40):
Welcome to The Sim Cafe and today we're honored to
welcome.
Lou Obendorf.
A pioneer leader in medicalsimulation and healthcare
innovation is the founder andformer chairman of Medical
Education Technologies METI.
Lou transformed a small startupinto a global leader in
simulation-based medicaleducation.
(02:01):
His work has impactedinstitutions worldwide.
Beyond his professionalachievements, lou is deeply
committed to education.
He and his wife, rosemary,established the Rosemary and Lou
Oberndorf 63 Endowment atSeattle Preparatory School to
support tuition assistance forfuture generations of students.
Please welcome me in joiningLou Oberndorf to the Simcafe
(02:25):
podcast as we delve into hisjourney and insights into his
evolving work.
So thank you and welcomeWelcome, Jerrod.
Jerrod Jeffries (02:34):
Thank you and Lou thanks so much for being on
with us.
Thank you very much.
It's my privilege.
Deb Tauber (02:39):
Do you want to add anything to your introduction?
Lou Obendorf. (02:48):
w Well, you started me in 1963, but that
involves a passion of our familyand that is for education and
all of our, the majority of our,if you will, giving back or
paying it forward, has been inthe area of education,
educational grants.
We're especially passionateabout first gen graduates, first
10 students at every level, butanyway, that's what we've been
(03:11):
privileged and blessed and thisis our, that's our area of
giving back.
Disclaimer/ Innovative Sim (03:14):
Both my wife and.
Lou Obendorf. (03:15):
I are first gen, so it's really really close to
our hearts.
Jerrod Jeffries (03:19):
So I think we have a lot to get through.
So we might, you know we wantto be respective of your time,
but also I think our listenersare pretty to get through.
So we might, you know we wantto be respective of your time,
but also I think our listenersare pretty excited to, as we are
.
So we'll try to chunk this upinto you know a couple parts.
So if you see us kind ofpushing things along in popcorn
and some questions, you'll seethat.
You know we just have someinsights from our listeners that
we want to get to Sure.
(03:40):
But first maybe you want totell us about maybe some those
earlier or newer to simulationwho's Medi?
What you know, what's, what'sit become now?
What can they relate to?
And start from the early visionand the origins of it.
Lou Obendorf. (03:54):
Well, I think the best way to it really goes back
to 1996, when at the time I wasworking for a major aerospace
defense company working out ofNew York City and we were
looking for commercial ideas totry to take our
military-developed technologyinto other areas of commercial
opportunities.
And I came across an inventionby a team of anesthesiologists
(04:18):
and biomed engineers at theUniversity of Florida that had
basically developed ananesthesia patient simulator
funded by the Anesthesia PatientSafety Foundation back in the
early late 80s, early 90s, andbecame very excited about it.
And why I was excited about itone was it was part of our
mission, my mission to take thecompany into other areas of
(04:40):
corporation, but it reflectedsimulation and simulation was
and the technology of simulationwe were very comfortable with
because we've been using themilitary and aerospace has been
using simulation, had been usingsimulation for 100 years, 75 or
most years up to that point intime.
So we saw the power ofsimulation and we really
(05:02):
believed that healthcare couldbenefit from that.
So we were excited about it.
I was excited about it, I wentahead and licensed the project
for the company.
About two years later they weregetting ready to do something
different and they were going ina different direction and I
purchased the product line whichwas the patient simulator
product line from the Universityof Florida license and then
started METI M-E-T-I from theUniversity of Florida, IS and
(05:27):
then started METI M-E-T-I.
And really what we were aboutto begin with and we talked
about it earlier was to not onlyto commercialize this, what we
thought was an exciting productand opportunity.
But to our surprise we foundthat healthcare had not and was
not using the power ofsimulation and had not and was
not using the power ofsimulation and had not.
I tell the story that I used totell when I would meet with
(05:48):
investment bankers or othercivilian audiences,
non-healthcare audiences that ifyou had entered, let's say,
Harvard Medical School in 1990,for instance, call it 85 to make
sure you would have been taughtthe same way that they'd been
teaching it for 100 plus years,if you were to enter, then I
(06:10):
would talk about it in the 90sand the 2000s, I could even say
it today.
But if you were to entermedical school, nursing school,
paramedic, community colleges,anywhere in the world today
where health care education isdelivered, you will find this
technology that's.
That's the journey that we'vebeen on, but we believed in that
in 1996.
And so that's why we startedMedi.
(06:31):
We began to explore that, as wetalked earlier, and we were
selling mostly to medicalschools, early adopter, mostly
anesthesiologists.
But we needed to build a biggermarketplace and, as we spoke
earlier, we decided that we hadto move it into nursing
education and overnight ouraddressable market, in a
business sense, exploded on us,and that's where we continue to
(06:55):
focus on medical schools andhigher end high fidelity
simulations.
But also we began to move itinto nursing education, began to
move it into nursing education.
If you look today at any of thenursing organizations or IMSH
or even SESM coming up in Europeincreasingly, but mostly IMSH,
the nursing component, nursingeducation component, is quite
(07:15):
dominant in terms of population,in terms of expenditures, in
terms of capital expenditures,in terms of research.
I'm particularly proud of thefact that our small role in this
but nursing has really become afull-fledged partner in
healthcare education Now usingtechnology, on a par with their
(07:38):
medical school academiccounterparts, if you will.
So it's a wandering answer, butthe fact is that's what we
started to do.
As we began to apply technology, which we were very comfortable
with from our years inaerospace, we began to explore
new and better ways to present aplatform that could really
(07:59):
represent the human body.
Everybody talks about trauma,but in fact, you've seen, over
the growth of the last 25 or 30years, we've gone beyond just
trauma education, althoughthat's still extremely important
High risk, high reward kind ofevents.
We've gone way beyond that andso, as the technology has
(08:20):
followed that way, so that wasour beginning.
One of the key things that webelieved in passionately at Medi
was that we could build thetechnology and the old idea that
build the technology, and theywill come.
We quickly discovered that whatwas a critical piece of this
success was the curriculum,because in the beginning, if you
(08:41):
think about it, having neverused the technology, academics
really didn't have a familiarityor a comfort with how to
develop the curriculum toutilize the technology.
So our early years, at METIreally explored the idea of
developing curriculum around theuse of these simulators, if you
(09:04):
will.
Developing curriculum aroundthe use of these simulators, if
you will.
I remember one of the majorprojects that we launched at
METI in nursing education wasthat I challenged my learning
department to take the nursingcurriculum the two-year or
four-year nursing curriculum,take it apart, look at every
component, every module thatcould benefit from the use of
(09:26):
simulation, identify that, buildthat roadmap, that template,
and then build curriculum aroundeach of those modules on how to
use it.
And we literally reconstructedthen the nursing curriculum and
we partnered with North TexasUniversity, I believe.
If I recall, we vetted itthrough a variety of nursing
(09:46):
colleges and that was really oneof our major advancements and
that I believe could partner thetechnology and the use of it
and how to use it with yourcurriculum.
(10:08):
It became a far better and afar quicker adaptation.
Jerrod Jeffries (10:13):
And you guys did that yourself.
You didn't work with a bookpublisher or someone quickly.
We did it ourselves.
We did it ourselves.
Lou Obendorf. (10:21):
We did it ourselves, but we did it
absolutely in full partnershipwith an accredited nursing
school, north Texas.
But then, when that was done,and then we then brought in a
team of both two-year andfour-year RN programs to vet it,
so we validated it through thatmechanism and then launched it.
I believe it's still in use bywhat has become MedE, became CAE
(10:46):
, became Elevate, if you will,to this day.
And then on top of that webrought in the whole learning
management system, which was agreat.
So we were all about the wholeeducation ecosystem.
That's right and that's whatenabled, I believe, looking back
on it, I believe that's whataccelerated the adoption of this
technology.
Jerrod Jeffries (11:06):
Yeah, because that was one of my pieces was
you know a lot of people trythis, the moonshot, or try a
large, large piece, and you knowthere's a lot of failures.
And one of my thoughts was whydid Medi succeed?
And I think, taking it from agrass roots, full ecosystem,
start with curriculum, meetpeople, people where they are,
and then don't just throwtechnology at them, but have
(11:28):
them understand why technologyis going to help accelerate
their, their curve, and so,precisely, and and I think we
were.
Lou Obendorf. (11:35):
we were clearly pioneers in that we pioneered
that approach.
I believe that prior to that,you basically built task
trainers and you taught them howto use the task trainer yeah,
that was your training and thenyou left it with them and they
figured out how to use it andhow to apply it to their
students, etc.
This was far more intrinsic.
As you said, the educationalecosystem.
(11:56):
This is what we tackle.
That and to this day, even mybelief and every effort that
I've, that I'm involved with,even to to this day, is all
about curriculum and education.
That's the glue or the fuel orwhatever term you want to use,
but that's the thing that reallyaccelerates the use and
adoption of the technology.
Jerrod Jeffries (12:17):
Wonderful, that's a brief history, but
those are some of the I love it.
Yeah, and I think since then,right since Medi was acquired by
CAE that was mid-2000s 2011,.
Lou Obendorf. (12:29):
It was acquired by CAE Aerospace.
Jerrod Jeffries (12:31):
Yes, yeah, so take us through more of the
present situation now withoperative experience or whatever
else.
Lou Obendorf. (12:38):
Well, thank you.
Thank you for letting me talkabout OEI operative experience.
Let me talk about OEI experience, as in any business exit and
what have you in the world, youhave a period of time where you
have to sort of stand out.
They have a non-compete.
If you will, you have to standout and not do anything.
I stood down after 2011 for anumber of years but stayed
(13:00):
involved, of course, with SSHand Thessum, still continued to
give back.
That was really our abilitythen to have the capacity to
give back to both of thoseorganizations, and it was
extremely important to me to dothat.
But along the way, I keptlooking at new technology and
seeing stuff.
I was introduced in themid-teens I think it was late
(13:20):
teens about a technology thatwas started by a retired trauma
surgeon called OperativeExperience, OEI, and what
appealed to me was theanatomical fidelity, the touch
and the feel.
One of the things that, fromthe very first day of Medi, the
complaint was we conquered thetechnology.
(13:41):
But then the complaint alwayswas well, it doesn't look and
feel like a real human andunfortunately, to this day, most
of what you see on an exhibitfloor, if you will, still does
not look and touch and feel andact like a real human, and so
(14:01):
there's always that doubt in ourminds.
So we were always on that quest, if you will.
Well, this Dr Bob Buckman hassort of figured it out.
He had come up with a formulafor better skin and more durable
skin etc.
He was extraordinarilypassionate about.
He was a trauma surgeon, so hewas passionate about anatomical
fidelity and what have you.
(14:21):
So they were raising money and Iinvested in the company and
since then I've basically takenOEI operative experience
primarily into the combatmedicine, trauma world.
So that's what I'm involvedwith, that's what we're involved
with now.
We happen to have an obstetrics, an OBGYN product line,
birthing simulator, patentedbirthing simulator as an OBGYN
(14:44):
line, but our major focus itreally is in combat medicine and
trauma.
That's what we're doing today.
Deb Tauber (14:51):
Thank you.
Now, what about the future, thevision and transformation?
What areas of health caresimulation do you think are
still underserved?
Lou Obendorf. (14:59):
Well, I think reality is still a problem, and
I didn't say artificial or AR, Ithink just this quest for
reality and the patient of theproduct that you're using to
represent as closely as possiblethe human patient, if you will.
That's a bit of a conundrum interms of talking about that,
because all of these othertechnologies that we see out
(15:20):
there artificial reality,augmented reality, avatars and
all of that are always workingtowards getting more and more
reality, so that, again, thefundamental definition of
simulation is the suspension ofdisbelief.
And so, if you look at thebreadth of technologies and
(15:40):
products and efforts out therenow, they're all, one way or
another, trying to close the gapon the suspension of disbelief,
they're trying to make it asreal as possible.
Having said that, that's aphysical, that's a material
initiative, it's a technologyeffort in terms of artificial
(16:01):
intelligence augmented reality,virtual reality, avatars, et
cetera, and an expansion ofvarious task trainers, that,
even when a task trainer, if youwill, has to suspend disbelief,
it has to reflect in my opinion, it has to reflect as nearly as
possible the patient thatyou're treating and you're
(16:21):
learning about, and that is ageneral philosophy that I
continue to try to pursue, evenwith OEI to make it as real as
possible.
How do you do that?
Well, there's a variety oftechnologies.
What is the future?
I remember talking to theexecutive board of SSH, which I
(16:43):
do every year at IMSH, and beingasked that same question.
And somebody said well, whatabout virtual reality?
And I said well, if you'retalking about virtual reality?
And I pointed to the exhibitfloor and I said if you find it
on the exhibit floor, and youfind it everywhere on the
exhibit floor, it's alreadyyesterday's news.
(17:05):
From a challenging standpoint.
Now it has to be perfected, ithas to be brought to market, it
has to be shown that it iseffectively integrated with the
learning experience.
Granted, it still has a lot.
I believe it still has a longways to go, even though there's
a lot of virtual reality outthere and augmented reality.
Now, is that my sense is, isthat the real challenge?
(17:25):
If you want to look at what'sgoing to happen next week,
that's the old Gretzky thing,you know skate to where the
puck's going to be, or it'sreally artificial intelligence,
in my opinion.
And I don't understandartificial intelligence, so I've
(17:54):
spent a lifetime in technologyand generally I'm the dumbest
guy in the room, so I you know Igoing to permeate, of course,
everything we do, from thecurriculum argument that I made
just a few minutes ago to how weuse artificial intelligence to
drive the experiential learningof the use of the simulator.
Is artificial intelligencegoing to be buried?
(18:15):
in the simulator, is it going tobe an adjunct to it?
It's going to permeateeverything that we do.
Yes, virtual reality, augmentedreality will be the next level.
I think of adoption, but Ibelieve that the challenge for
virtual reality and augmentedreality is A to make it
affordable, scalable.
Remember, we're teaching a lotof students and so it has to be
(18:38):
scalable.
It has to be effective whenit's scalable to a number of
students and it has to bereproducible.
It has to be produced.
Now, the production piece of it, the technology piece, is
advanced.
You can see that, you can seethat in our everyday life.
But is it scalable, is itaffordable?
And I think that those are thechallenges for virtual reality.
And then augmented realitybeing the merging, if you will,
(19:01):
of the physical and theartificial.
That's an application and atechnology challenge.
How do you effectively mergethese so that they are used in
an integrated fashion, so thatyou literally can suspend
disbelief, if that makes anysense?
Those are the challenges, andwe may be getting back to a
challenge.
As we said earlier, not onlydoes the technology have to be
(19:22):
advanced to that point, but thecurriculum and the application
of it, how it integrates withthe physical.
I'm a great believer, and alwayshave been, is that the end of
the day, a health careprofessional ultimately still
has to lay hands on a patient.
I know everybody says you canbe these gloves and it feels
(19:44):
like and it looks like anartificial and augmented reality
.
All of that I got it.
I've been hearing it forever.
Eventually you've got to layyour hands on a patient.
You've got to feel what that'slike, especially now in the
world that we are in OEI withcombat medicine.
You could pretend to be workingon a wounded soldier under fire.
You can have the lights and thescreen, all of that, and that's
all come about.
(20:05):
We build our environments rightTo put you under stress, but
the ultimate payoff is how doyou treat that patient?
And we've always believed that.
I've always believed that andmaybe I'm the mannequin guy.
So consequently, I get back tothe physical.
I got it.
Maybe I circle around andjustify the physical, but the
fundamental element of a surgeoncould practice on the virtual
(20:28):
reality and the augmented andall of that, but at some point
in time they've got to actuallyoperate on a patient.
Jerrod Jeffries (20:35):
So, hearing all that, I want to actually flip
to the other side of if you hadunlimited resources, zero
constraints, whatever, okay,what one tool would you would
you build?
Lou Obendorf. (20:44):
wow, well, the fact that I don't have an easy
answer for you should justifynobody giving me unlimited funds
because I would probablysquander it.
Uh, I don't have a good.
I think I would love to have, Iguess, a robot.
(21:05):
I'm the mannequin guy, so Iguess a mannequin that walks and
talks and dances, jumps andbleeds and does all of that.
I think, ultimately, that Ithink I would like to have a
learning environment.
I would build a learningenvironment that eventually
surrounds that patient and thatlearning experience.
But people are doing that.
And if I built that virtualcave, if you will, could the
(21:28):
healthcare community andeducation community afford it?
Jerrod Jeffries (21:31):
Yeah.
Lou Obendorf. (21:32):
Think about virtual caves and that type of
thing.
It's getting easier and easier.
But in fact, if you were tobuild out a full environment and
do you need a full environmentyou probably need a lot of task
trainers leading up to the finalact, if you will, the final
test.
But if you were to build thatenvironment people are doing it.
I mean, there are centersaround the world that are
building that out.
(21:52):
I mean up in Nebraska and a fewother places now that I know of
and I'm not up to speed exactlywhat's going on.
They're building out theseenvironments, but the more
technology they put into that,the more unaffordable it becomes
.
So you could build thisultimate system and I don't have
a good answer for you.
But if I did, I wonder whetherthe community could afford it.
Jerrod Jeffries (22:16):
Sure, and back to what your earlier comment
right, it's scalability.
Yes, the US is one very largemarket, but you're also wanting
to make sure that you'reincluding those globally, and I
think how cost structures andresource allocations happen
outside the US, even within, ofcourse, but you got to always
think about scalability and howthat's going to work and
(22:37):
affordability.
Lou Obendorf. (22:39):
And I think that's probably the you know.
Ultimately, you'd love to builda, you'd love to be able to
produce a 10 or $15,000 or 20,15,000 Euro simulator that does
everything that the HBS did 25,30 years ago.
Jerrod Jeffries (22:53):
We're not there yet.
We're not there yet, and AImight not even be able to do
that.
Lou Obendorf. (22:58):
So Well, AI will be a pieces of that, but with AI
to me at least, again the dummyin the room the ai is not a, is
not an integrated finalsolution unto itself.
Right, it's pieces, it's anadjunct, it's use of it, it's
not an end object, it's not aproduct, in my opinion.
Deb Tauber (23:17):
No I agree, it's just a.
It's a tool yeah, as is.
Lou Obendorf. (23:21):
Virtual reality is a tool and it's an adjunct,
if you will.
Deb Tauber (23:25):
Now I'm going to ask you a little bit of a different
question.
But through all this, what hasbeen some of the things that
have really surprised you inyour career?
Because you've really, you area pioneer by all rights.
Lou Obendorf. (23:42):
Well, as I've said a number of occasions,
being a pioneer, and I washonored, you know, to receive
that award from ssh, being thefirst businessman, non-educator,
non-health care professional toreceive it toward lairdal, of
course was the second.
Being a pioneer only means thatyou're old, but the pioneers
(24:02):
also get killed.
Well, okay, look at him.
Jerrod Jeffries (24:06):
We're going more and more and more of it
here.
Lou Obendorf. (24:10):
Being a pioneer only means that you're old and
you've been around a long time,and what that also means is that
yeah, you see a lot.
And increasingly, as I tell mystaff now and I tell people
understand something I'm full ofanecdotes, because that's all a
pioneer has to rely on isanecdotes of what he's seen or
he or she has seen over the life.
What surprised me?
I was surprised by how let's goback 30 years.
(24:34):
The first big surprise was that, coming out of aerospace and
being comfortable with the useof simulation and the power of
simulation, I was surprised byhow backward looking healthcare
was, healthcare education, andit took me a while to understand
what I think was the reason.
I think I've come to understandfor the first 10 or 15 years of
(24:57):
that journey was thathealthcare medicine had us to
practice on, had our families topractice on, they had a lot of
students, a lot of the subjectmatter to practice on and
therefore it seemed to me thatthe healthcare education, the
medical education, to someextent less or so of the nursing
education was done bypracticing on us for hours and
(25:19):
hours and hours.
The original purpose of theanesthesia team at Florida and
at Stanford, and David Gaba andMike Good are the two gurus, if
you will.
One, of course, David Gaba atStanford.
I think people forget that.
Mike Good was the leader of theteam at the University of
Florida, went on to be dean ofthe medical school there and the
(25:40):
CEO of Utah Health.
He's since retired.
The reason they did it isbecause, as residents living
under that old system, theyreally didn't see enough to
prepare them to be actualattending, to actually handle an
emergency.
Because again in those days, ifyou were a resident or even an
(26:00):
intern, something criticalhappens.
You get hip checked out of theway and the professor jumps in
and saves the day.
That's why they startedbuilding this trainer to begin
with.
So again back to what I used totell civilian audiences,
bankers and what have you isthat they've been practicing on
they mean healthcare, the docs.
Medicine has been practicing onus for a thousand years and
(26:24):
we're not going to have any moreof it.
We're done with it.
Our society is done with it.
And that surprised me in thefirst 10 years, the lack of
vision on the part of thehealthcare education, medical
education primarily medicaleducation community.
That was a big surprise that wehad to overcome.
(26:49):
The next surprise was the factthat even though we as
technology and educators keptinnovating rapidly, aggressively
at Medi outrunning, if you will, the competition, your former
employer, always trying to stayahead of them was that there was
a limit to how innovative wecould be.
What do I mean by that?
We could come up with new.
We came up with the firstpediatric high fidelity
simulator.
We came up with the firstfemale high fidelity simulator.
(27:12):
But we were doing that on such arapid pace that I came to
understand finally that we weremoving too fast.
We were moving too fast for ourmarketplace to absorb.
The technology is fine, we knowhow to move technology.
We still do the team that Ihave at OEI.
We still have that same Mediphilosophy.
We had to be more careful abouthow fast we introduce new
(27:35):
products.
That was a revelation to methat I had to learn through time
and we were successful and wesurvived it.
But the speed to market and thespeed to innovation has to be
tempered to some extent with howfast the community can adopt it
.
Go ahead.
Jerrod Jeffries (27:52):
And do you think that's because it's
healthcare, do you think it'sbecause it's education, or do
you think it's a mix, or do youthink it's other factors?
Lou Obendorf. (27:59):
I think it's a mix.
I think in the beginning it wasthe curriculum piece of it.
How do I use this?
Because we were pouringtechnology into this community,
which is basically, if you thinkabout it, from 1996, we
developed, you say, 3g, but wehad the Mediman, we had
constantly bringing out newproducts, the PDSM, et cetera.
We were in 10 years.
(28:20):
We brought out most of thoseproducts.
And yet the community was stilllearning and adapting.
It's all dumbfounded.
Jerrod Jeffries (28:26):
Wait, what is this?
That's right.
Lou Obendorf. (28:29):
And that was the first revelation.
It said we've got to bring thecurriculum with it Because we
realized that we were pouringthis technology to them.
They would buy it because theywere adopters.
And what have you?
It's a combination of theeducation as well as the
technology.
Technology I can movetechnology.
Look at AI and all this.
I can move technology at arapid pace.
It moves faster than theeducational community can absorb
(28:51):
it and utilize it effectively.
Today, the community, I thinkwhat I'm pleasantly surprised
and quite rewarding, I think, isthis community has become
really sophisticated in itsacceptance, understanding to a
large extent the power of thistechnology, of all kinds of
(29:12):
simulation I call itexperiential learning and so
that they are driving where theindustry should be going.
And what do I mean by that?
In the beginning, at Medi in1996, go to a group of
physicians or nursing educatorsand say what do you need?
Because they didn't understandtechnology.
So we had to basically drivethat to the marketplace.
(29:36):
We had to get the technology tothem and help them understand
it, absorb it through theeducational efforts.
I'm talking about curriculum,et cetera.
Today, for instance, operativeexperience I've been in the
company now maybe five six years.
This community knows more aboutwhat they need and understands
the technology and haveexperience with the technology
(29:57):
that they never had 25 years ago.
So I have to now understandbetter.
I have to listen to thembecause they have something to
tell me.
30 years ago they didn't know.
We spoke different languages.
I'm wandering off your questionabout surprises, but I think
it's the transition, thesurprise.
First, their inability, or whathave you, to really understand
(30:19):
what it was and adopt it.
Then, as they adopted it, howthey needed the curriculum, and
now to this day.
I think the surprise is thatnow we have to listen to them.
We still have to talk to themabout technology.
They have to better understandand we have to better educate
the community, the usercommunity, on what technology
can do, because, first andforemost, they're educators,
(30:41):
they're not technology experts.
Industry that's the industry,that's the responsibility of
industry and, to get beyondanother element of mine, it's
the Me Too.
I think there's an awful lot ofMe Too in the industry today.
You see an awful lot ofduplication of efforts, people
hurting, if you will, towards anapplication or a technology, et
(31:01):
cetera, without really fullyunderstanding how it should be
used.
It is a technology fortechnology's sake is what I'm
saying.
So I was surprised Back to yourquestion about surprise, what I
was surprised by the fact thatthe community, I had to be
careful that it wasn't justtechnology for technology's sake
, and I think that still existsin our community.
(31:24):
I really do.
I think every new idea, etcetera, from an industry
standpoint, let's go to product,raise some money and go to
market, well, without everreally understanding and doing
your homework in terms of howit's to be adapted and how it's
to be used.
So you know raising money andthe old, you know the dirty
business of business and that iscash flow and what have you?
(31:45):
It's budgets, et cetera.
I think that surprised me.
We had to learn a lot aboutthat.
That was surprising to me.
We thought, coming out of theaerospace world, that medicine
had as much money as they couldthat they needed because it felt
and looked like the aerospaceworld.
Well, that ain't true.
And we found out that healthcare over even the last 30 years
, even to this day, does nothave unlimited funds.
(32:07):
They don't have an unlimitedsource of funds, as you do in
the defense business, if youwill, or even the aerospace
business, airlines and what haveyou.
So they don't have the kind ofcapital and budgets.
That was surprising to me.
We had to adapt to that.
We had to learn that as well.
Deb Tauber (32:20):
Now that I think about it, Now you have a
reflection of your legacy, nowthat I think about it.
Now you have a reflection ofyour legacy.
You've received many honors,including the SSH Pioneer Award
and having the lecture namedafter you.
How do you hope people willremember your contributions to
this field?
Lou Obendorf. (32:36):
Oh, my goodness, I got to self-reflect on that.
Is that what you're asking meto do?
Well, let me see.
Let me put my humble hat on soI can really be effectively
humble.
I think we changed.
We METI to what role I playedin that.
I think we changed the face ofhealthcare education In 30 years
(32:57):
.
We helped create an industry.
To be a part of that, toexperience that for any quote
entrepreneur or inventor orpioneer, if you will to have the
incredible privilege of beingat the beginning of an industry
and see it blossom and see itactually grow into a viable
industry, is something that Ithink will be, if you will, the
(33:21):
legacy, one of the lines in thelegacy.
But changing the face ofhealthcare education and patient
safety, if you will, and makinghealthcare providers better, I
think is one of the things thatwe'll be extremely proud of.
The idea that I can go Iexperience it quite often now as
I go now with operativeexperience but I come to IMSA et
(33:42):
cetera, and I run across peoplewho says, yeah, lou, we've
known you for 25 years and I gowell, help me with your name,
turn the badge around so I cansee your name, et cetera.
They reflect on how they usedto come to our global user
meetings HBSN we started aglobal user meetings at Medi and
that they've literally spenttheir career, because they're
(34:02):
all older now with Medi.
You can call it CAE, you cancall it health, but they still
refer to them as METI man.
I think that's the legacy and Iget that reflection as well.
So I think that's part of thelegacy.
I guess that that's a legacy.
It certainly is a nice feeling.
Deb Tauber (34:22):
Yeah, no, you have a lot to be proud of.
You really have done so manythings and we thank you for all
your contributions.
Lou Obendorf. (34:29):
I have to learn how to say you're welcome too.
So I always, we always wereflourished, thank you, thank you
, thank you, you're welcome.
Jerrod Jeffries (34:36):
That's very nice of you.
The world's certainly adifferent place than it was 30
years ago in health care,education and well, all three of
all three of us have havecareers from it, don't we?
Lou Obendorf. (34:46):
education and well all three of us, all three
of us have have careers from it,don't we?
I mean literally, we've createdlives and careers that uh and
save lives, and of course it'ssaved lives, but on a personal
base, on a.
On a personal basis we'vecreated careers yeah and that
I'll take just quickly in theearly days when you would go to
and I also experienced this whenI was in for a time was in
surgical education as well.
(35:07):
30 years ago, for a professor oran aspiring professor, if you
will, in medicine and to someextent in nursing education as
well would say I want to become,I want to go into simulation, I
want to become an educator.
They were really advised bytheir advisors to say why do you
want to do that?
That's a career killer.
I can remember professors ofanesthesiologists that wanted
(35:31):
that, were really early adoptersthat wanted to took their
career in hand and put it on theline to go get this similar,
this new technology, and theywere being told by their peers
and by their advisors thatyou're going to, you're going to
kill your career, you don'twant to go into education, you
want to go into this, you wantto go to this specialty or that
specialty, etc.
So and I've said this from thestage of IMSH where I'm
(35:54):
privileged to be able to makecomments is that that room is
full of real pioneers and it'seasier now, but it's still a
rush, it's still a difficulty,it's still your take.
Our folks are always puttingtheir careers on the line,
advocating for this learningtool, and are constantly trying
to defend themselves, et cetera,et cetera, when they could have
(36:16):
gone into more traditionalspecialties, if you will, both
in medicine and nursing, butalso in education.
So yeah, that's cool, that'sreally gratifying.
Deb Tauber (36:29):
Well, I want to thank you so much for your time
and for everything that you'vedone and with that, we can do.
You have any final words thatyou'd like to leave our
listeners with?
Lou Obendorf. (36:39):
I hope this has been educational for all of us
and I hope I answered yourquestions effectively.
Jerrod Jeffries (36:43):
I think we would have many more, but this
has been wonderful and reallyappreciate the time Lou.
Lou Obendorf. (36:49):
Well, you're going to see me at SESM, Deb.
I assume you're going to see meat IMSH.
Those are the next two bigmeetings.
Deb Tauber (36:54):
That sounds wonderful.
Thank you so much.
What an honor.
Lou Obendorf. (36:57):
Thank you, Thank you guys.
Disclaimer/ Innovative Sim (36:59):
Take care.
Thanks again to Innovative SimSolutions for sponsoring this
week's episode.
Ready to revolutionize how youteach and train?
Then check out the basics ofhealthcare simulations with
Innovative Sim Solutions and DebTauber today.
Thanks for joining us here atThe Sim Cafe.
(37:24):
We hope you enjoyed.
Visit us at www.
innovativesimsolutions.
com and be sure to hit that likeand subscribe button so you
never miss an episode.
Innovative Sim Solutions isyour one-stop shop for your
simulation needs A turnkeysolution.
The views and opinions expressed in
this program are those of thespeakers and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions orpositions of anyone at
Innovative Sim Solutions or oursponsors.
Thanks to Innovative SimSolutions for sponsoring this
week's episode.
Are you a healthcareprofessional or educator looking
to level up your trainingmethods?
(00:20):
Then you need to check out theBasics of Healthcare Simulation,
a dynamic foundational coursedesigned to introduce you to the
powerful world ofsimulation-based learning, from
mannequins to virtual reality.
This class breaks down thetools, techniques and strategies
that bring clinical educationto life safely, effectively and
realistically.
(00:40):
Whether you're brand new tosimulation or just want a
refresher course, this will giveyou the confidence and skills
to create engaging, high-impactlearning experiences.
Ready to revolutionize how toteach and train, reach out to
Deb Tauber at Innovative SimSolutions to set up your
(01:00):
training today.
Welcome to The Sim Cafe, apodcast produced by the team at
Innovative Sim Solutions, editedby Shelly Houser.
Join our host, Deb Tauber, andco-host, Jerrod Jeffries as they
sit down with subject matterexperts from across the globe to
reimagine clinical educationand the use of simulation.
(01:23):
Clinical education and the useof simulation.
So pour yourself a cup ofrelaxation, sit back, tune in
and learn something new from TheSim Cafe.
Deb Tauber (01:40):
Welcome to The Sim Cafe and today we're honored to
welcome.
Lou Obendorf.
A pioneer leader in medicalsimulation and healthcare
innovation is the founder andformer chairman of Medical
Education Technologies METI.
Lou transformed a small startupinto a global leader in
simulation-based medicaleducation.
(02:01):
His work has impactedinstitutions worldwide.
Beyond his professionalachievements, lou is deeply
committed to education.
He and his wife, rosemary,established the Rosemary and Lou
Oberndorf 63 Endowment atSeattle Preparatory School to
support tuition assistance forfuture generations of students.
Please welcome me in joiningLou Oberndorf to the Simcafe
(02:25):
podcast as we delve into hisjourney and insights into his
evolving work.
So thank you and welcomeWelcome, Jerrod.
Jerrod Jeffries (02:34):
Thank you and Lou thanks so much for being on
with us.
Thank you very much.
It's my privilege.
Deb Tauber (02:39):
Do you want to add anything to your introduction?
Lou Obendorf. (02:48):
w Well, you started me in 1963, but that
involves a passion of our familyand that is for education and
all of our, the majority of our,if you will, giving back or
paying it forward, has been inthe area of education,
educational grants.
We're especially passionateabout first gen graduates, first
10 students at every level, butanyway, that's what we've been
(03:11):
privileged and blessed and thisis our, that's our area of
giving back.
Disclaimer/ Innovative Sim (03:14):
Both my wife and.
Lou Obendorf. (03:15):
I are first gen, so it's really really close to
our hearts.
Jerrod Jeffries (03:19):
So I think we have a lot to get through.
So we might, you know we wantto be respective of your time,
but also I think our listenersare pretty to get through.
So we might, you know we wantto be respective of your time,
but also I think our listenersare pretty excited to, as we are
.
So we'll try to chunk this upinto you know a couple parts.
So if you see us kind ofpushing things along in popcorn
and some questions, you'll seethat.
You know we just have someinsights from our listeners that
we want to get to Sure.
(03:40):
But first maybe you want totell us about maybe some those
earlier or newer to simulationwho's Medi?
What you know, what's, what'sit become now?
What can they relate to?
And start from the early visionand the origins of it.
Lou Obendorf. (03:54):
Well, I think the best way to it really goes back
to 1996, when at the time I wasworking for a major aerospace
defense company working out ofNew York City and we were
looking for commercial ideas totry to take our
military-developed technologyinto other areas of commercial
opportunities.
And I came across an inventionby a team of anesthesiologists
(04:18):
and biomed engineers at theUniversity of Florida that had
basically developed ananesthesia patient simulator
funded by the Anesthesia PatientSafety Foundation back in the
early late 80s, early 90s, andbecame very excited about it.
And why I was excited about itone was it was part of our
mission, my mission to take thecompany into other areas of
(04:40):
corporation, but it reflectedsimulation and simulation was
and the technology of simulationwe were very comfortable with
because we've been using themilitary and aerospace has been
using simulation, had been usingsimulation for 100 years, 75 or
most years up to that point intime.
So we saw the power ofsimulation and we really
(05:02):
believed that healthcare couldbenefit from that.
So we were excited about it.
I was excited about it, I wentahead and licensed the project
for the company.
About two years later they weregetting ready to do something
different and they were going ina different direction and I
purchased the product line whichwas the patient simulator
product line from the Universityof Florida license and then
started METI M-E-T-I from theUniversity of Florida, IS and
(05:27):
then started METI M-E-T-I.
And really what we were aboutto begin with and we talked
about it earlier was to not onlyto commercialize this, what we
thought was an exciting productand opportunity.
But to our surprise we foundthat healthcare had not and was
not using the power ofsimulation and had not and was
not using the power ofsimulation and had not.
I tell the story that I used totell when I would meet with
(05:48):
investment bankers or othercivilian audiences,
non-healthcare audiences that ifyou had entered, let's say,
Harvard Medical School in 1990,for instance, call it 85 to make
sure you would have been taughtthe same way that they'd been
teaching it for 100 plus years,if you were to enter, then I
(06:10):
would talk about it in the 90sand the 2000s, I could even say
it today.
But if you were to entermedical school, nursing school,
paramedic, community colleges,anywhere in the world today
where health care education isdelivered, you will find this
technology that's.
That's the journey that we'vebeen on, but we believed in that
in 1996.
And so that's why we startedMedi.
(06:31):
We began to explore that, as wetalked earlier, and we were
selling mostly to medicalschools, early adopter, mostly
anesthesiologists.
But we needed to build a biggermarketplace and, as we spoke
earlier, we decided that we hadto move it into nursing
education and overnight ouraddressable market, in a
business sense, exploded on us,and that's where we continue to
(06:55):
focus on medical schools andhigher end high fidelity
simulations.
But also we began to move itinto nursing education, began to
move it into nursing education.
If you look today at any of thenursing organizations or IMSH
or even SESM coming up in Europeincreasingly, but mostly IMSH,
the nursing component, nursingeducation component, is quite
(07:15):
dominant in terms of population,in terms of expenditures, in
terms of capital expenditures,in terms of research.
I'm particularly proud of thefact that our small role in this
but nursing has really become afull-fledged partner in
healthcare education Now usingtechnology, on a par with their
(07:38):
medical school academiccounterparts, if you will.
So it's a wandering answer, butthe fact is that's what we
started to do.
As we began to apply technology, which we were very comfortable
with from our years inaerospace, we began to explore
new and better ways to present aplatform that could really
(07:59):
represent the human body.
Everybody talks about trauma,but in fact, you've seen, over
the growth of the last 25 or 30years, we've gone beyond just
trauma education, althoughthat's still extremely important
High risk, high reward kind ofevents.
We've gone way beyond that andso, as the technology has
(08:20):
followed that way, so that wasour beginning.
One of the key things that webelieved in passionately at Medi
was that we could build thetechnology and the old idea that
build the technology, and theywill come.
We quickly discovered that whatwas a critical piece of this
success was the curriculum,because in the beginning, if you
(08:41):
think about it, having neverused the technology, academics
really didn't have a familiarityor a comfort with how to
develop the curriculum toutilize the technology.
So our early years, at METIreally explored the idea of
developing curriculum around theuse of these simulators, if you
(09:04):
will.
Developing curriculum aroundthe use of these simulators, if
you will.
I remember one of the majorprojects that we launched at
METI in nursing education wasthat I challenged my learning
department to take the nursingcurriculum the two-year or
four-year nursing curriculum,take it apart, look at every
component, every module thatcould benefit from the use of
(09:26):
simulation, identify that, buildthat roadmap, that template,
and then build curriculum aroundeach of those modules on how to
use it.
And we literally reconstructedthen the nursing curriculum and
we partnered with North TexasUniversity, I believe.
If I recall, we vetted itthrough a variety of nursing
(09:46):
colleges and that was really oneof our major advancements and
that I believe could partner thetechnology and the use of it
and how to use it with yourcurriculum.
(10:08):
It became a far better and afar quicker adaptation.
Jerrod Jeffries (10:13):
And you guys did that yourself.
You didn't work with a bookpublisher or someone quickly.
We did it ourselves.
We did it ourselves.
Lou Obendorf. (10:21):
We did it ourselves, but we did it
absolutely in full partnershipwith an accredited nursing
school, north Texas.
But then, when that was done,and then we then brought in a
team of both two-year andfour-year RN programs to vet it,
so we validated it through thatmechanism and then launched it.
I believe it's still in use bywhat has become MedE, became CAE
(10:46):
, became Elevate, if you will,to this day.
And then on top of that webrought in the whole learning
management system, which was agreat.
So we were all about the wholeeducation ecosystem.
That's right and that's whatenabled, I believe, looking back
on it, I believe that's whataccelerated the adoption of this
technology.
Jerrod Jeffries (11:06):
Yeah, because that was one of my pieces was
you know a lot of people trythis, the moonshot, or try a
large, large piece, and you knowthere's a lot of failures.
And one of my thoughts was whydid Medi succeed?
And I think, taking it from agrass roots, full ecosystem,
start with curriculum, meetpeople, people where they are,
and then don't just throwtechnology at them, but have
(11:28):
them understand why technologyis going to help accelerate
their, their curve, and so,precisely, and and I think we
were.
Lou Obendorf. (11:35):
we were clearly pioneers in that we pioneered
that approach.
I believe that prior to that,you basically built task
trainers and you taught them howto use the task trainer yeah,
that was your training and thenyou left it with them and they
figured out how to use it andhow to apply it to their
students, etc.
This was far more intrinsic.
As you said, the educationalecosystem.
(11:56):
This is what we tackle.
That and to this day, even mybelief and every effort that
I've, that I'm involved with,even to to this day, is all
about curriculum and education.
That's the glue or the fuel orwhatever term you want to use,
but that's the thing that reallyaccelerates the use and
adoption of the technology.
Jerrod Jeffries (12:17):
Wonderful, that's a brief history, but
those are some of the I love it.
Yeah, and I think since then,right since Medi was acquired by
CAE that was mid-2000s 2011,.
Lou Obendorf. (12:29):
It was acquired by CAE Aerospace.
Jerrod Jeffries (12:31):
Yes, yeah, so take us through more of the
present situation now withoperative experience or whatever
else.
Lou Obendorf. (12:38):
Well, thank you.
Thank you for letting me talkabout OEI operative experience.
Let me talk about OEI experience, as in any business exit and
what have you in the world, youhave a period of time where you
have to sort of stand out.
They have a non-compete.
If you will, you have to standout and not do anything.
I stood down after 2011 for anumber of years but stayed
(13:00):
involved, of course, with SSHand Thessum, still continued to
give back.
That was really our abilitythen to have the capacity to
give back to both of thoseorganizations, and it was
extremely important to me to dothat.
But along the way, I keptlooking at new technology and
seeing stuff.
I was introduced in themid-teens I think it was late
(13:20):
teens about a technology thatwas started by a retired trauma
surgeon called OperativeExperience, OEI, and what
appealed to me was theanatomical fidelity, the touch
and the feel.
One of the things that, fromthe very first day of Medi, the
complaint was we conquered thetechnology.
(13:41):
But then the complaint alwayswas well, it doesn't look and
feel like a real human andunfortunately, to this day, most
of what you see on an exhibitfloor, if you will, still does
not look and touch and feel andact like a real human, and so
(14:01):
there's always that doubt in ourminds.
So we were always on that quest, if you will.
Well, this Dr Bob Buckman hassort of figured it out.
He had come up with a formulafor better skin and more durable
skin etc.
He was extraordinarilypassionate about.
He was a trauma surgeon, so hewas passionate about anatomical
fidelity and what have you.
(14:21):
So they were raising money and Iinvested in the company and
since then I've basically takenOEI operative experience
primarily into the combatmedicine, trauma world.
So that's what I'm involvedwith, that's what we're involved
with now.
We happen to have an obstetrics, an OBGYN product line,
birthing simulator, patentedbirthing simulator as an OBGYN
(14:44):
line, but our major focus itreally is in combat medicine and
trauma.
That's what we're doing today.
Deb Tauber (14:51):
Thank you.
Now, what about the future, thevision and transformation?
What areas of health caresimulation do you think are
still underserved?
Lou Obendorf. (14:59):
Well, I think reality is still a problem, and
I didn't say artificial or AR, Ithink just this quest for
reality and the patient of theproduct that you're using to
represent as closely as possiblethe human patient, if you will.
That's a bit of a conundrum interms of talking about that,
because all of these othertechnologies that we see out
(15:20):
there artificial reality,augmented reality, avatars and
all of that are always workingtowards getting more and more
reality, so that, again, thefundamental definition of
simulation is the suspension ofdisbelief.
And so, if you look at thebreadth of technologies and
(15:40):
products and efforts out therenow, they're all, one way or
another, trying to close the gapon the suspension of disbelief,
they're trying to make it asreal as possible.
Having said that, that's aphysical, that's a material
initiative, it's a technologyeffort in terms of artificial
(16:01):
intelligence augmented reality,virtual reality, avatars, et
cetera, and an expansion ofvarious task trainers, that,
even when a task trainer, if youwill, has to suspend disbelief,
it has to reflect in my opinion, it has to reflect as nearly as
possible the patient thatyou're treating and you're
(16:21):
learning about, and that is ageneral philosophy that I
continue to try to pursue, evenwith OEI to make it as real as
possible.
How do you do that?
Well, there's a variety oftechnologies.
What is the future?
I remember talking to theexecutive board of SSH, which I
(16:43):
do every year at IMSH, and beingasked that same question.
And somebody said well, whatabout virtual reality?
And I said well, if you'retalking about virtual reality?
And I pointed to the exhibitfloor and I said if you find it
on the exhibit floor, and youfind it everywhere on the
exhibit floor, it's alreadyyesterday's news.
(17:05):
From a challenging standpoint.
Now it has to be perfected, ithas to be brought to market, it
has to be shown that it iseffectively integrated with the
learning experience.
Granted, it still has a lot.
I believe it still has a longways to go, even though there's
a lot of virtual reality outthere and augmented reality.
Now, is that my sense is, isthat the real challenge?
(17:25):
If you want to look at what'sgoing to happen next week,
that's the old Gretzky thing,you know skate to where the
puck's going to be, or it'sreally artificial intelligence,
in my opinion.
And I don't understandartificial intelligence, so I've
(17:54):
spent a lifetime in technologyand generally I'm the dumbest
guy in the room, so I you know Igoing to permeate, of course,
everything we do, from thecurriculum argument that I made
just a few minutes ago to how weuse artificial intelligence to
drive the experiential learningof the use of the simulator.
Is artificial intelligencegoing to be buried?
(18:15):
in the simulator, is it going tobe an adjunct to it?
It's going to permeateeverything that we do.
Yes, virtual reality, augmentedreality will be the next level.
I think of adoption, but Ibelieve that the challenge for
virtual reality and augmentedreality is A to make it
affordable, scalable.
Remember, we're teaching a lotof students and so it has to be
(18:38):
scalable.
It has to be effective whenit's scalable to a number of
students and it has to bereproducible.
It has to be produced.
Now, the production piece of it, the technology piece, is
advanced.
You can see that, you can seethat in our everyday life.
But is it scalable, is itaffordable?
And I think that those are thechallenges for virtual reality.
And then augmented realitybeing the merging, if you will,
(19:01):
of the physical and theartificial.
That's an application and atechnology challenge.
How do you effectively mergethese so that they are used in
an integrated fashion, so thatyou literally can suspend
disbelief, if that makes anysense?
Those are the challenges, andwe may be getting back to a
challenge.
As we said earlier, not onlydoes the technology have to be
(19:22):
advanced to that point, but thecurriculum and the application
of it, how it integrates withthe physical.
I'm a great believer, and alwayshave been, is that the end of
the day, a health careprofessional ultimately still
has to lay hands on a patient.
I know everybody says you canbe these gloves and it feels
(19:44):
like and it looks like anartificial and augmented reality
.
All of that I got it.
I've been hearing it forever.
Eventually you've got to layyour hands on a patient.
You've got to feel what that'slike, especially now in the
world that we are in OEI withcombat medicine.
You could pretend to be workingon a wounded soldier under fire.
You can have the lights and thescreen, all of that, and that's
all come about.
(20:05):
We build our environments rightTo put you under stress, but
the ultimate payoff is how doyou treat that patient?
And we've always believed that.
I've always believed that andmaybe I'm the mannequin guy.
So consequently, I get back tothe physical.
I got it.
Maybe I circle around andjustify the physical, but the
fundamental element of a surgeoncould practice on the virtual
(20:28):
reality and the augmented andall of that, but at some point
in time they've got to actuallyoperate on a patient.
Jerrod Jeffries (20:35):
So, hearing all that, I want to actually flip
to the other side of if you hadunlimited resources, zero
constraints, whatever, okay,what one tool would you would
you build?
Lou Obendorf. (20:44):
wow, well, the fact that I don't have an easy
answer for you should justifynobody giving me unlimited funds
because I would probablysquander it.
Uh, I don't have a good.
I think I would love to have, Iguess, a robot.
(21:05):
I'm the mannequin guy, so Iguess a mannequin that walks and
talks and dances, jumps andbleeds and does all of that.
I think, ultimately, that Ithink I would like to have a
learning environment.
I would build a learningenvironment that eventually
surrounds that patient and thatlearning experience.
But people are doing that.
And if I built that virtualcave, if you will, could the
(21:28):
healthcare community andeducation community afford it?
Jerrod Jeffries (21:31):
Yeah.
Lou Obendorf. (21:32):
Think about virtual caves and that type of
thing.
It's getting easier and easier.
But in fact, if you were tobuild out a full environment and
do you need a full environmentyou probably need a lot of task
trainers leading up to the finalact, if you will, the final
test.
But if you were to build thatenvironment people are doing it.
I mean, there are centersaround the world that are
building that out.
(21:52):
I mean up in Nebraska and a fewother places now that I know of
and I'm not up to speed exactlywhat's going on.
They're building out theseenvironments, but the more
technology they put into that,the more unaffordable it becomes
.
So you could build thisultimate system and I don't have
a good answer for you.
But if I did, I wonder whetherthe community could afford it.
Jerrod Jeffries (22:16):
Sure, and back to what your earlier comment
right, it's scalability.
Yes, the US is one very largemarket, but you're also wanting
to make sure that you'reincluding those globally, and I
think how cost structures andresource allocations happen
outside the US, even within, ofcourse, but you got to always
think about scalability and howthat's going to work and
(22:37):
affordability.
Lou Obendorf. (22:39):
And I think that's probably the you know.
Ultimately, you'd love to builda, you'd love to be able to
produce a 10 or $15,000 or 20,15,000 Euro simulator that does
everything that the HBS did 25,30 years ago.
Jerrod Jeffries (22:53):
We're not there yet.
We're not there yet, and AImight not even be able to do
that.
Lou Obendorf. (22:58):
So Well, AI will be a pieces of that, but with AI
to me at least, again the dummyin the room the ai is not a, is
not an integrated finalsolution unto itself.
Right, it's pieces, it's anadjunct, it's use of it, it's
not an end object, it's not aproduct, in my opinion.
Deb Tauber (23:17):
No I agree, it's just a.
It's a tool yeah, as is.
Lou Obendorf. (23:21):
Virtual reality is a tool and it's an adjunct,
if you will.
Deb Tauber (23:25):
Now I'm going to ask you a little bit of a different
question.
But through all this, what hasbeen some of the things that
have really surprised you inyour career?
Because you've really, you area pioneer by all rights.
Lou Obendorf. (23:42):
Well, as I've said a number of occasions,
being a pioneer, and I washonored, you know, to receive
that award from ssh, being thefirst businessman, non-educator,
non-health care professional toreceive it toward lairdal, of
course was the second.
Being a pioneer only means thatyou're old, but the pioneers
(24:02):
also get killed.
Well, okay, look at him.
Jerrod Jeffries (24:06):
We're going more and more and more of it
here.
Lou Obendorf. (24:10):
Being a pioneer only means that you're old and
you've been around a long time,and what that also means is that
yeah, you see a lot.
And increasingly, as I tell mystaff now and I tell people
understand something I'm full ofanecdotes, because that's all a
pioneer has to rely on isanecdotes of what he's seen or
he or she has seen over the life.
What surprised me?
I was surprised by how let's goback 30 years.
(24:34):
The first big surprise was that, coming out of aerospace and
being comfortable with the useof simulation and the power of
simulation, I was surprised byhow backward looking healthcare
was, healthcare education, andit took me a while to understand
what I think was the reason.
I think I've come to understandfor the first 10 or 15 years of
(24:57):
that journey was thathealthcare medicine had us to
practice on, had our families topractice on, they had a lot of
students, a lot of the subjectmatter to practice on and
therefore it seemed to me thatthe healthcare education, the
medical education, to someextent less or so of the nursing
education was done bypracticing on us for hours and
(25:19):
hours and hours.
The original purpose of theanesthesia team at Florida and
at Stanford, and David Gaba andMike Good are the two gurus, if
you will.
One, of course, David Gaba atStanford.
I think people forget that.
Mike Good was the leader of theteam at the University of
Florida, went on to be dean ofthe medical school there and the
(25:40):
CEO of Utah Health.
He's since retired.
The reason they did it isbecause, as residents living
under that old system, theyreally didn't see enough to
prepare them to be actualattending, to actually handle an
emergency.
Because again in those days, ifyou were a resident or even an
(26:00):
intern, something criticalhappens.
You get hip checked out of theway and the professor jumps in
and saves the day.
That's why they startedbuilding this trainer to begin
with.
So again back to what I used totell civilian audiences,
bankers and what have you isthat they've been practicing on
they mean healthcare, the docs.
Medicine has been practicing onus for a thousand years and
(26:24):
we're not going to have any moreof it.
We're done with it.
Our society is done with it.
And that surprised me in thefirst 10 years, the lack of
vision on the part of thehealthcare education, medical
education primarily medicaleducation community.
That was a big surprise that wehad to overcome.
(26:49):
The next surprise was the factthat even though we as
technology and educators keptinnovating rapidly, aggressively
at Medi outrunning, if you will, the competition, your former
employer, always trying to stayahead of them was that there was
a limit to how innovative wecould be.
What do I mean by that?
We could come up with new.
We came up with the firstpediatric high fidelity
simulator.
We came up with the firstfemale high fidelity simulator.
(27:12):
But we were doing that on such arapid pace that I came to
understand finally that we weremoving too fast.
We were moving too fast for ourmarketplace to absorb.
The technology is fine, we knowhow to move technology.
We still do the team that Ihave at OEI.
We still have that same Mediphilosophy.
We had to be more careful abouthow fast we introduce new
(27:35):
products.
That was a revelation to methat I had to learn through time
and we were successful and wesurvived it.
But the speed to market and thespeed to innovation has to be
tempered to some extent with howfast the community can adopt it
.
Go ahead.
Jerrod Jeffries (27:52):
And do you think that's because it's
healthcare, do you think it'sbecause it's education, or do
you think it's a mix, or do youthink it's other factors?
Lou Obendorf. (27:59):
I think it's a mix.
I think in the beginning it wasthe curriculum piece of it.
How do I use this?
Because we were pouringtechnology into this community,
which is basically, if you thinkabout it, from 1996, we
developed, you say, 3g, but wehad the Mediman, we had
constantly bringing out newproducts, the PDSM, et cetera.
We were in 10 years.
(28:20):
We brought out most of thoseproducts.
And yet the community was stilllearning and adapting.
It's all dumbfounded.
Jerrod Jeffries (28:26):
Wait, what is this?
That's right.
Lou Obendorf. (28:29):
And that was the first revelation.
It said we've got to bring thecurriculum with it Because we
realized that we were pouringthis technology to them.
They would buy it because theywere adopters.
And what have you?
It's a combination of theeducation as well as the
technology.
Technology I can movetechnology.
Look at AI and all this.
I can move technology at arapid pace.
It moves faster than theeducational community can absorb
(28:51):
it and utilize it effectively.
Today, the community, I thinkwhat I'm pleasantly surprised
and quite rewarding, I think, isthis community has become
really sophisticated in itsacceptance, understanding to a
large extent the power of thistechnology, of all kinds of
(29:12):
simulation I call itexperiential learning and so
that they are driving where theindustry should be going.
And what do I mean by that?
In the beginning, at Medi in1996, go to a group of
physicians or nursing educatorsand say what do you need?
Because they didn't understandtechnology.
So we had to basically drivethat to the marketplace.
(29:36):
We had to get the technology tothem and help them understand
it, absorb it through theeducational efforts.
I'm talking about curriculum,et cetera.
Today, for instance, operativeexperience I've been in the
company now maybe five six years.
This community knows more aboutwhat they need and understands
the technology and haveexperience with the technology
(29:57):
that they never had 25 years ago.
So I have to now understandbetter.
I have to listen to thembecause they have something to
tell me.
30 years ago they didn't know.
We spoke different languages.
I'm wandering off your questionabout surprises, but I think
it's the transition, thesurprise.
First, their inability, or whathave you, to really understand
(30:19):
what it was and adopt it.
Then, as they adopted it, howthey needed the curriculum, and
now to this day.
I think the surprise is thatnow we have to listen to them.
We still have to talk to themabout technology.
They have to better understandand we have to better educate
the community, the usercommunity, on what technology
can do, because, first andforemost, they're educators,
(30:41):
they're not technology experts.
Industry that's the industry,that's the responsibility of
industry and, to get beyondanother element of mine, it's
the Me Too.
I think there's an awful lot ofMe Too in the industry today.
You see an awful lot ofduplication of efforts, people
hurting, if you will, towards anapplication or a technology, et
(31:01):
cetera, without really fullyunderstanding how it should be
used.
It is a technology fortechnology's sake is what I'm
saying.
So I was surprised Back to yourquestion about surprise, what I
was surprised by the fact thatthe community, I had to be
careful that it wasn't justtechnology for technology's sake
, and I think that still existsin our community.
(31:24):
I really do.
I think every new idea, etcetera, from an industry
standpoint, let's go to product,raise some money and go to
market, well, without everreally understanding and doing
your homework in terms of howit's to be adapted and how it's
to be used.
So you know raising money andthe old, you know the dirty
business of business and that iscash flow and what have you?
(31:45):
It's budgets, et cetera.
I think that surprised me.
We had to learn a lot aboutthat.
That was surprising to me.
We thought, coming out of theaerospace world, that medicine
had as much money as they couldthat they needed because it felt
and looked like the aerospaceworld.
Well, that ain't true.
And we found out that healthcare over even the last 30 years
, even to this day, does nothave unlimited funds.
(32:07):
They don't have an unlimitedsource of funds, as you do in
the defense business, if youwill, or even the aerospace
business, airlines and what haveyou.
So they don't have the kind ofcapital and budgets.
That was surprising to me.
We had to adapt to that.
We had to learn that as well.
Deb Tauber (32:20):
Now that I think about it, Now you have a
reflection of your legacy, nowthat I think about it.
Now you have a reflection ofyour legacy.
You've received many honors,including the SSH Pioneer Award
and having the lecture namedafter you.
How do you hope people willremember your contributions to
this field?
Lou Obendorf. (32:36):
Oh, my goodness, I got to self-reflect on that.
Is that what you're asking meto do?
Well, let me see.
Let me put my humble hat on soI can really be effectively
humble.
I think we changed.
We METI to what role I playedin that.
I think we changed the face ofhealthcare education In 30 years
(32:57):
.
We helped create an industry.
To be a part of that, toexperience that for any quote
entrepreneur or inventor orpioneer, if you will to have the
incredible privilege of beingat the beginning of an industry
and see it blossom and see itactually grow into a viable
industry, is something that Ithink will be, if you will, the
(33:21):
legacy, one of the lines in thelegacy.
But changing the face ofhealthcare education and patient
safety, if you will, and makinghealthcare providers better, I
think is one of the things thatwe'll be extremely proud of.
The idea that I can go Iexperience it quite often now as
I go now with operativeexperience but I come to IMSA et
(33:42):
cetera, and I run across peoplewho says, yeah, lou, we've
known you for 25 years and I gowell, help me with your name,
turn the badge around so I cansee your name, et cetera.
They reflect on how they usedto come to our global user
meetings HBSN we started aglobal user meetings at Medi and
that they've literally spenttheir career, because they're
(34:02):
all older now with Medi.
You can call it CAE, you cancall it health, but they still
refer to them as METI man.
I think that's the legacy and Iget that reflection as well.
So I think that's part of thelegacy.
I guess that that's a legacy.
It certainly is a nice feeling.
Deb Tauber (34:22):
Yeah, no, you have a lot to be proud of.
You really have done so manythings and we thank you for all
your contributions.
Lou Obendorf. (34:29):
I have to learn how to say you're welcome too.
So I always, we always wereflourished, thank you, thank you
, thank you, you're welcome.
Jerrod Jeffries (34:36):
That's very nice of you.
The world's certainly adifferent place than it was 30
years ago in health care,education and well, all three of
all three of us have havecareers from it, don't we?
Lou Obendorf. (34:46):
education and well all three of us, all three
of us have have careers from it,don't we?
I mean literally, we've createdlives and careers that uh and
save lives, and of course it'ssaved lives, but on a personal
base, on a.
On a personal basis we'vecreated careers yeah and that
I'll take just quickly in theearly days when you would go to
and I also experienced this whenI was in for a time was in
surgical education as well.
(35:07):
30 years ago, for a professor oran aspiring professor, if you
will, in medicine and to someextent in nursing education as
well would say I want to become,I want to go into simulation, I
want to become an educator.
They were really advised bytheir advisors to say why do you
want to do that?
That's a career killer.
I can remember professors ofanesthesiologists that wanted
(35:31):
that, were really early adoptersthat wanted to took their
career in hand and put it on theline to go get this similar,
this new technology, and theywere being told by their peers
and by their advisors thatyou're going to, you're going to
kill your career, you don'twant to go into education, you
want to go into this, you wantto go to this specialty or that
specialty, etc.
So and I've said this from thestage of IMSH where I'm
(35:54):
privileged to be able to makecomments is that that room is
full of real pioneers and it'seasier now, but it's still a
rush, it's still a difficulty,it's still your take.
Our folks are always puttingtheir careers on the line,
advocating for this learningtool, and are constantly trying
to defend themselves, et cetera,et cetera, when they could have
(36:16):
gone into more traditionalspecialties, if you will, both
in medicine and nursing, butalso in education.
So yeah, that's cool, that'sreally gratifying.
Deb Tauber (36:29):
Well, I want to thank you so much for your time
and for everything that you'vedone and with that, we can do.
You have any final words thatyou'd like to leave our
listeners with?
Lou Obendorf. (36:39):
I hope this has been educational for all of us
and I hope I answered yourquestions effectively.
Jerrod Jeffries (36:43):
I think we would have many more, but this
has been wonderful and reallyappreciate the time Lou.
Lou Obendorf. (36:49):
Well, you're going to see me at SESM, Deb.
I assume you're going to see meat IMSH.
Those are the next two bigmeetings.
Deb Tauber (36:54):
That sounds wonderful.
Thank you so much.
What an honor.
Lou Obendorf. (36:57):
Thank you, Thank you guys.
Disclaimer/ Innovative Sim (36:59):
Take care.
Thanks again to Innovative SimSolutions for sponsoring this
week's episode.
Ready to revolutionize how youteach and train?
Then check out the basics ofhealthcare simulations with
Innovative Sim Solutions and DebTauber today.
Thanks for joining us here atThe Sim Cafe.
(37:24):
We hope you enjoyed.
Visit us at www.
innovativesimsolutions.
com and be sure to hit that likeand subscribe button so you
never miss an episode.
Innovative Sim Solutions isyour one-stop shop for your
simulation needs A turnkeysolution.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com