Questions like these two have made me wonder about my own answer in the first linked question. I have to admit, I haven't 'tested' the kits I put together. I have some wilderness survival training (primarily from when I was a kid in the BSA), but that was more than a couple of years ago. (Quite a few more than a couple, tbh.)
If an emergency kit or procedure isn't adequate -- whether for backpacking or restarting an airplane engine in flight, one would prefer to find that out before an actual emergency; this means testing.
I came close to testing my emergency kit when I took a day hike and seriously pushed it to far and too long. However, small problem -- I didn't have the kit with me! Luckily, I made it back to my car before it got too dark to safely proceed. I have since been religious about checking I have the kit with me on even easy hikes.
I'm tempted to head out camping, set up a base camp with my normal tent and supplies, then move myself 50 yards off with just my day hiking bag and emergency kit and see how well it works. (Of course, I'd wait 'til spring on account of you know, not being crazy.) I figure if I can avoid the necessity or even temptation of heading back to my base camp, it's a successful test.
Of course, this is not a completely realistic test, because there is no emergency, and thus no panic or confusion leading to poor judgment.
Is there a better way -- more realistic and/or harsher -- to test an emergency kit?
I suppose I could look for a class (I'm from MA, so I'd start with the AMC, I think). If nothing else, between this question and my thinking about doing the test, I can already see two things I'd add to my kit.