Assessing Team Performance: A Mixed-Methods Analysis Using Interprofessional in situ Simulation.

Introduction: Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams. Methods: This mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2-4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the Team Performance Observation Tool (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), and Ottawa Crisis Resource Management Global Rating Scale (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Eighteen team-based simulations took place between January-April 2021. Raters' scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance. Conclusion: Current team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual's contribution to a team's performance.

Creating a Safe Space for Simulation: Is it Time to Stop Calling Them Confederates?

SUMMARY STATEMENT: Use of the term "confederate" is often used in research literature to describe an individual allied with the research team. Confederate is used in simulation research to describe participants allied with the simulation facilitator. Confederate can also refer to the Confederate States of America and has connotations of racial injustice and slavery. Use of this term in simulation may adversely affect psychological safety of learners. Use of the term within the literature is a potential driver of use during simulation sessions. We completed a rapid review of the health care simulation literature to determine the frequency of the term confederate. From 2000 to 2021, 2635 uses of confederate were identified in 765 articles. There seems to be an increased trend in use of this word. We argue that alternative terms exist and should be used to maximize psychological safety of learners.

Implementation of a pediatric in situ, train-the-trainer simulation program in general emergency departments.

Background: Most children receive emergency care in general emergency departments (EDs). Pediatric resuscitations require specific equipment and weight-based dosing that may be less familiar to general ED healthcare professionals. In situ simulation (ISS) improves teamwork and problem solving, and it may identify latent safety threats. This innovative program brought academic faculty to participating hospitals and taught simulation principles in a small-group environment. This format removed many of the barriers to implementing simulations for general EDs and was intended to teach principles for utilizing simulation to meet unique departmental needs. Methods: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) framework, ED teams at eight hospitals participated in a train-the-trainer program from 2016 to 2020 intended to help them implement their own ISSs. Training covered benefits of ISS, use of simulation for identifying latent safety threats, debriefing principles, and potential safety risks of ISS. Faculty also provided on-site mentoring during the implementation phase. We identified factors and barriers that contributed to the successful adoption of an ISS program. Results: Most hospitals continued their ISS program after the study ended. Several themes emerged as pearls and pitfalls to implementing a train-the-trainer program. Successful teams had strong nursing and physician leadership participation, and team members had positive working relationships with early positive feedback which encouraged future ISS implementation. Barriers to simulation included high staff turnover of nurses and physicians as well as social distancing protocols related to infection control. Conclusions: Academic EDs can partner with general EDs to implement a train-the-trainer simulation program. We describe facilitators and barriers to implementing a train-the-trainer ISS program in general EDs to improve emergency care for high-risk, low-frequency events.

19-Year-Old with Sudden Onset Left Testicular Pain.

CASE PRESENTATION: A previously healthy 19-year-old man presented to the emergency department with severe, sudden onset of left testicular pain. Physical exam revealed a left high-riding, horizontally oriented testicle without cremasteric reflex. Point-of-care ultrasound was used to confirm the diagnosis of testicular torsion, as well as to guide manual detorsion, verifying return of blood flow after reduction. DISCUSSION: Testicular torsion is a urologic emergency in which testicular viability is time dependent. Point-of-care ultrasound can be an important and helpful tool to not only confirm suspicion but help guide adequacy of blood flow return after manual detorsion in conjunction with comprehensive ultrasound.

A mixed-methods needs assessment to identify pharmacology education objectives for emergency medicine residents.

Objectives: Medication errors represent a significant threat to patient safety. Pharmacotherapy is one of the 23 Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education milestones for emergency medicine, yet there is minimal understanding of what content should be prioritized during training. The study aim was to develop objectives for a patient-safety focused pharmacology curriculum for emergency medicine residents. Methods: We incorporated data from a de-identified safety event database and survey responses of 30 faculty and clinical pharmacists at a single-site suburban university hospital with 24-hour emergency medicine pharmacists and an annual volume of approximately 70,000. We reviewed the database to quantify types and severity of medication errors over a 5-year period for a total of 370 errors. Anonymous surveys included categorical items that we analyzed with descriptive statistics and short answer questions that underwent thematic analysis by 2 coders. We summarized all data sources to identify curriculum gaps. Results: Common medication errors reported in our database were wrong dose (43%) and computer order entry errors (14%). Knowledge gaps were medication cost (63%), pregnancy risk information (60%), antibiotic stewardship (53%), interactions (47%), and side effects (47%). Qualitative analysis revealed the need to optimize computer order entry, understand the scope of critical medications, use references, and consult pharmacists. Integration of data suggested specific medications should be covered in curricular efforts, including antibiotics, analgesics, sedatives, and insulin. Conclusion: We developed objectives of pharmacology topics to prioritize during emergency medicine training to enhance prescribing safety. This study is limited due to its small sample and single institution source of data. Future studies should investigate the impact of pharmacology curriculum on minimizing clinical errors.

From intern to "accepted": A guide to preparing for fellowship in emergency medicine.

Introduction: The number of fellowship options for emergency medicine (EM) physicians continues to expand. While guides exist to help residents explore individual fellowship pathways, we aimed to create a comprehensive guide for all residents considering fellowship. Methods: At the direction of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Board, 9 members of the Fellowship Guide Workgroup, including members of the Fellowship Approval Committee, and 2 members of SAEM Residents and Medical Students (RAMS) group collaboratively developed the guide using available evidence and expert opinion when high-quality evidence was unavailable. The guide was reviewed and approved by all members. Results: The guide offers advice to EM residents on how to conceptualize key aspects of their training with respect to preparation for fellowship, including scholarship, teaching, leadership, and electives. Additionally, it offers perspective on selecting a fellowship that matches the resident's interests and goals and successfully applying. Conclusion: This fellowship guide for EM residents considering fellowship summarizes the best currently available advice for residents considering fellowship training after residency.

The OSSE: Development and validation of an "Objective Structured Supervision Evaluation".

Background: Trainee supervision and teaching are distinct skills that both require faculty physician competence to ensure patient safety. No standard approach exists to teach physician supervisory competence, resulting in variable trainee oversight and safety threats. The Objective Structured Teaching Evaluation (OSTE) does not adequately incorporate the specific skills required for effective supervision. To address this continuing medical education gap, the authors aimed to develop and identify validity evidence for an "Objective Structured Supervision Evaluation" (OSSE) for attending physicians, conceptually modeled on the historic OSTE. Methods: An expert panel used an iterative process to create an OSSE instrument, which was a checklist of key supervision items to be evaluated during a simulated endotracheal intubation scenario. Three trained "standardized residents" scored faculty participants' performance using the instrument. Validity testing modeled a contemporary approach using Kane's framework. Participants underwent simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) with deliberate practice until meeting a minimum passing standard (MPS). Results: The final instrument contained 19 items, including three global rating measures. Testing domains included supervision climate, participant control of patient care, trainee evaluation, instructional skills, case-specific measures, and overall supervisor rating. Reliability of the assessment tool was excellent (ICC range 0.84-0.89). The assessment tool had good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.813). Out of 24 faculty participants, 17 (70.8%) met the MPS on initial assessment. All met the MPS after SBML and average score increased by 19.5% (95% CI of the difference 10.3%-28.8%, p = 0.002).

Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice in Virtual Reality: Teaching Transvenous Pacemaker Insertion to Emergency Medicine Residents.

Introduction Transvenous pacemaker insertion is a critical life-saving procedure that is infrequently performed. Traditional mannequin-based training paradigms are resource intensive and sometimes inadequate due to time constraints. Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice (RCDP) is an effective teaching modality for highly scripted procedures. We propose using a simulation-based technique of RCDP in virtual reality (VR) to teach this procedure. Methods Sixteen emergency medicine residents were recruited. A pre-survey was administered at the start of the session, followed by a baseline task trainer checklist-based assessment. This checklist was created based on expert consensus. Participants then underwent the RCDP VR intervention with a subsequent repeat checklist-based assessment as well as a post-survey.  Results Post-test scores were found to be significantly higher than pre-test scores after residents completed VR deliberate practice simulation (19.5±3.5 vs 24.1±2.0; p<0.001). Subanalysis did not reveal any significant difference based on post-graduate year, previous performance of procedure on a live patient, or previous VR experience. The experience increased participant feelings of preparedness and comfort in performing the procedure (2-disagree vs 4-agree) based on a 5-point Likert scale.  Conclusions Virtual reality using RCDP to teach transvenous pacemaker insertion demonstrated an improvement in task trainer performance. Further investigation into whether this translates into better patient outcomes or can be generalized to other procedures needs to be considered.

Assessment of Entrustable Professional Activities Using a Web-Based Simulation Platform During Transition to Emergency Medicine Residency: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The 13 core entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are key competency-based learning outcomes in the transition from undergraduate to graduate medical education in the United States. Five of these EPAs (EPA2: prioritizing differentials, EPA3: recommending and interpreting tests, EPA4: entering orders and prescriptions, EPA5: documenting clinical encounters, and EPA10: recognizing urgent and emergent conditions) are uniquely suited for web-based assessment. OBJECTIVE: In this pilot study, we created cases on a web-based simulation platform for the diagnostic assessment of these EPAs and examined the feasibility and acceptability of the platform. METHODS: Four simulation cases underwent 3 rounds of consensus panels and pilot testing. Incoming emergency medicine interns (N=15) completed all cases. A maximum of 4 "look for" statements, which encompassed specific EPAs, were generated for each participant: (1) performing harmful or missing actions, (2) narrowing differential or wrong final diagnosis, (3) errors in documentation, and (4) lack of recognition and stabilization of urgent diagnoses. Finally, we interviewed a sample of interns (n=5) and residency leadership (n=5) and analyzed the responses using thematic analysis. RESULTS: All participants had at least one missing critical action, and 40% (6/15) of the participants performed at least one harmful action across all 4 cases. The final diagnosis was not included in the differential diagnosis in more than half of the assessments (8/15, 54%). Other errors included selecting incorrect documentation passages (6/15, 40%) and indiscriminately applying oxygen (9/15, 60%). The interview themes included psychological safety of the interface, ability to assess learning, and fidelity of cases. The most valuable feature cited was the ability to place orders in a realistic electronic medical record interface. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptability of a web-based platform for diagnostic assessment of specific EPAs. The approach rapidly identifies potential areas of concern for incoming interns using an asynchronous format, provides feedback in a manner appreciated by residency leadership, and informs individualized learning plans.

Using a Simulated Model and Mastery Learning Approach to Teach the Ultrasound-guided Serratus Anterior Plane Block to Emergency Medicine Residents: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) is a safe, single-injection alternative for pain control in patients with rib fractures. This pilot study aims to teach the ultrasound-guided SAPB to emergency medicine (EM) residents using a mastery learning approach. METHODS: A 19-item checklist was created and mastery was determined to be 17 of 19 items correct. This pass score was established using a Mastery Angoff standard-setting exercise with a group of EM experts. Learners participated in baseline testing on a simulated model and performance was assessed by two raters. Learners then watched an instructional video and participated in an individualized teaching session. Learners underwent deliberate practice followed by posttesting until mastery was achieved. Score differences in baseline testing and posttesting were analyzed using a paired t-test. Pre- and posttesting surveys were also completed by participants. RESULTS: Twenty-eight PGY-1 to -4 residents volunteered to participate in the study. The range of reported SAPBs seen previously was 0 to 5. The mean (±SD) number of items correct on the checklist for initial testing was 8.5 of 19 (±2.7), while the mean (±SD) final score was 18 of 19 (±0.6; p < 0.001). All participants met mastery standards after the curriculum intervention. Median self-reported procedural confidence was 2 out of 5 on a 5-point Likert scale before the session and 5 out of 5 after the session (Z = -4.681, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Using a mastery learning approach and simulated model, we were able to successfully train EM residents to perform the SAPB at a level of mastery and increase their overall confidence in executing this procedure.

Mastery learning improves simulated central venous catheter insertion by emergency medicine teaching faculty.

OBJECTIVES: Routine competency assessments of procedure skills, such as central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, do not occur beyond residency training. Evidence suggests variable, suboptimal attending physician procedure skills. Our study aimed to assess CVC insertion skill by academic emergency physicians, determine whether a simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) intervention improves performance and investigate for variables that predict competence. METHODS: This is a pretest-posttest study that evaluated simulated CVC insertion by emergency medicine (EM) faculty physicians. We assessed 44 volunteer participants at a large academic medical center over a 1-month period using a published 29-item checklist. Our primary outcome was the difference in assessment score before and after a SBML intervention. A secondary analysis evaluated predictors of pretest performance. RESULTS: A total of 44 subjects participated. Only four of 44 (9.1%) of subjects met a predefined minimum passing score on pretest. Mean assessment scores increased by 21.5% following the SBML intervention (95% confidence interval [CI] of the difference = 18.1% to 24.8%, p < 0.001). In a regression model, pretest scores increased by 10.8% (95% CI = 2.9 to 18.7%, p = 0.009) if subjects completed postgraduate training within 5 years. Frequency of CVC insertion did not predict performance, but 25 of 44 (56.8%) faculty members had no documented performance or supervision of a CVC insertion within 1 year of assessment. CONCLUSIONS: SBML is a promising method to assess and improve CVC insertion performance by EM faculty physicians. Recent completion of postgraduate training was a significant predictor of CVC insertion performance. Our results require validation in larger cohorts of EM physicians across other academic institutions.

Using In Situ Simulations to Improve Pediatric Patient Safety in Emergency Departments.

PROBLEM: Given the complex interaction among patients, individual providers, health care teams, and the clinical environment, patient safety events with serious consequences are most likely to occur in intensive care units, operating rooms, and emergency departments (EDs). With low-frequency, high-risk events such as pediatric resuscitations, health care teams working in EDs may not have the clinical opportunity to identify deficiencies, review and reinforce knowledge and skills, and problem solve in authentic clinical conditions. Without creating opportunities to safely practice, hospitals run the risk of having health care teams and environments that are not prepared to provide optimal patient care. APPROACH: Researchers employed a case series design and used a train-the-trainer model for in situ simulation. They trained health care professionals (instructors) in 3 general, nonacademic EDs in the San Francisco Bay area of California to perform pediatric resuscitation in situ simulations in 2018-2019. In situ simulations occur in the clinical work environment with simulation participants (teams) who are health care professionals taking care of actual patients. OUTCOMES: Teams made up of physicians, nurses, and ED technicians were evaluated for clinical performance, teamwork, and communication during in situ simulations conducted by instructors at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Debriefing after the simulations identified multiple latent safety threats (i.e., unidentified potential safety hazards) that were previously unknown. Each ED's pediatric readiness-its ability to provide emergency care for children-was evaluated at baseline and 12 months. NEXT STEPS: The authors will continue to monitor and examine the impact and sustainability of the pediatric in situ simulation program on pediatric readiness scores and its possible translation to other high-risk clinical settings, as well as explore the relationship between in situ simulations and patient outcomes.

Owning the Trauma Bay: Teaching Trauma Resuscitation to Emergency Medicine Residents and Nurses through In-situ Simulation.

Audience: The following two cases were designed to address learning objectives specific to interns, junior residents, and senior residents in emergency medicine, as well as trauma-certified emergency nurses. Introduction: Traumatic and unintentional injuries account for 5.8 million deaths across the globe each year, with a high proportion of those deaths occurring within the initial hour from the time of injury. This "golden hour" begins in the pre-hospital setting yet is predominantly spent in the emergency department (ED).1 Being able to effectively manage the multidisciplinary team required to care for trauma patients is crucial to providing timely and appropriate care. In-situ simulation, where the learning case is moved out of the simulation lab and into the typical workplace, has emerged as a powerful training tool for improving care-systems and team dynamics.2,3 Multiple specialties have shown in-situ simulation to be an effective strategy to teach both educational content as well as critical procedural and communication skills.4,5 In-situ simulation training has also been applied with similar success to trauma management, allowing for the simultaneous education of different learners with different roles in trauma resuscitations.6,7 We present two in-situ simulation cases with specific educational objectives and feedback mechanisms that allow for easy implementation of a cost-effective approach to training multidisciplinary emergency medicine providers in trauma management.Educational Objectives: The core objectives of these simulations center on effective teamwork and communication during trauma resuscitation of a critically ill patient. Both cases are designed to include maneuvers that require coordinating team members' actions during a stressful situation such as rolling a vomiting patient with a head injury and applying a binder to an unstable pelvic fracture. While the cases are largely focused on improving communication, salient learning points on emergent management of intracranial hemorrhage and unstable pelvic fractures are highlighted during the encounter. In addition, this simulation module allowed for the practice of graduated level of responsibilities amongst residents in the trauma bay. Educational Methods: Two in-situ simulation cases were run with the same group of learners using standardized patient actors as patients and functional medical equipment in actual rooms in the emergency department to recreate a realistic experience. These groups were composed of emergency medicine residents with at least one intern, one junior resident, and one senior resident in each group as well as a bedside nurse, documenting nurse, and simulation instructor. Each case was followed by a group debriefing session using multiple sources of feedback. Standardized patients, bedside nursing, and simulation instructors were all incorporated into the feedback and debriefing process. Research Methods: Pre- and post-simulation surveys were given to participants to assess their confidence in participating and leading trauma resuscitations. Results: A total of 29 emergency medicine residents completed both our pre- and post-survey. We found that less than half of those surveyed felt comfortable leading trauma resuscitations. After the simulation scenarios, an overwhelming majority agreed that they felt more prepared to run trauma resuscitations as a result of the simulation experience. In their free response comments participants also remarked upon the ability of in-situ simulation to better foster realistic learning opportunities with regards to communication and resuscitation management. Discussion: Based on our survey results, we found that a large portion of our participants did not feel comfortable leading trauma resuscitations. The post-survey and the free-text responses collected during the case scenarios show that our in-situ simulation proved to be an effective way to teach various types of learners new trauma roles and optimize high-stress communication during resuscitations. The use of in-situ simulation provides an effective and easily adapted framework even for those outside of academic centers and simulation labs while also offering an opportunity for multidisciplinary growth. Regular incorporation of similar learning opportunities into resident, nursing, and staff education can lead to better communication and teamwork during in-vivo patient encounters. Topics: Trauma resuscitation, in-situ simulation, code leader education, communication training.

Improving Emergency Department Airway Preparedness in the Era of COVID-19: An Interprofessional, In Situ Simulation.

Audience: The target audience for this airway simulation includes all emergency department (ED) staff who are potential members of a COVID-19 intubation team, including emergency medicine attendings, emergency medicine residents, nurses, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, and ED technicians. Introduction: As of May 7, 2020 there were 1,219,066 diagnosed cases of COVID-19 in the U.S. and 73,297 deaths.1 A special report from the Centers for Disease Control and prevention on infections in healthcare personnel reported 9,282 cases between February 12th and April 9th.2 Sars-CoV-2 is a novel virus that requires a careful, coordinated approach to airway management given the high risk of aerosolization.3 It is essential to train ED staff (1) to appropriately care for patients with suspected COVID-19 disease and (2) to provide an organized, safe working environment for providers during high-risk, aerosolizing procedures such as intubation. In addition to providing a set of airway management guidelines, we aimed to educate the staff through participation in a simulation activity. Due to the multiple team members involved and the array of equipment needed, an in-person in situ strategy was implemented. The goals of the simulation were to optimize patient care and minimize viral exposure to those involved during intubation. Educational Objectives: At the conclusion of the simulation session, learners will be able to: 1) Understand the need to notify team members of a planned COVID intubation including: physician, respiratory therapist, pharmacist, nurse(s), and ED technician. 2) Distinguish between in-room and out-of-room personnel during high-risk aerosolizing procedures. 3) Distinguish between in-room and out-of-room equipment during high-risk aerosolizing procedures to minimize contamination. 4) Appropriately select oxygenation therapies and avoid high-risk aerosolizing procedures. 5) Manage high risk scenarios such as hypotension or failed intubation and be prepared to give push-dose vasoactive medications or place a rescue device such as an I-gel ®. Educational Methods: This is a high-fidelity, interprofessional, in-situ simulation used to train a team of providers that would normally participate in the management of a patient with suspected COVID-19 requiring endotracheal intubation. Participants might include emergency medicine attendings, emergency medicine residents, nurses, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, and ED technicians. The patient is best represented by a high-fidelity mannequin such as Trauma HAL® (Miami, FL USA) https://www.gaumard.com/products/trauma/trauma-halr), with a monitor displaying vital signs and voice-response capabilities. The simulation includes an interprofessional debriefing session, during which an airway checklist, communication strategies, and best practices are reviewed. Research Methods: Airway management guidelines were developed by an interdisciplinary team at our institution. We used these guidelines from Stanford Health Care and best practices from a literature review to create a checklist of recommended steps. Two assessors used the checklist to track team actions. Any missed items were discussed in the team debrief and participants were encouraged to ask questions. At the end of the session, to check for understanding, participants were provided with a brief anonymous online survey accessed by a QR code. These assessments allowed the simulation team to iteratively edit the case before future simulations. Results: From 3/23/20-4/23/20, we held 12 in-situ simulations with 62 participants, including emergency medicine physicians, nurses, technicians, respiratory therapists, and pharmacists. Two individuals observed each simulation and compared team performance to the checklist of recommended steps. The actions that were not completed during the simulation served as teaching points during the simulation debrief. The debrief discussions helped to identify misconceptions regarding oxygenation strategies, difficulties in staff communication due to physical barriers, and various other quality or safety concerns. Participant reactions following the simulation and debriefs were overwhelmingly positive. Discussion: This simulation was an effective, easy-to-implement method of interprofessional team training for a risk-inherent procedure in the ED. We learned that the deliberate simulation of each step of the COVID19-specific intubation procedure with all team members provided opportunities to identify safety challenges in communication, equipment, and approach. Each debrief stimulated an excellent discussion among team members, and allowed for interprofessional feedback, clarification of questions, and recommendations for areas of improvement. Our main take-away from the pilot of this novel simulation case is that new, high-risk procedures require a coordinated team effort to minimize risks to patients and staff, and that team training is feasible and effective using frequent in situ simulations. Topics: Medical simulation, in-situ simulation, interprofessional, COVID-19, novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, intubation, medical education, health professions education, team training, airway management.

Mastery Learning Ensures Correct Personal Protective Equipment Use in Simulated Clinical Encounters of COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE) limits transmission of serious communicable diseases to healthcare workers, which is critically important in the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, prior studies illustrated that healthcare workers frequently err during application and removal of PPE. The goal of this study was to determine whether a simulation-based, mastery learning intervention with deliberate practice improves correct use of PPE by physicians during a simulated clinical encounter with a COVID-19 patient. METHODS: This was a pretest-posttest study performed in the emergency department at a large, academic tertiary care hospital between March 31-April 8, 2020. A total of 117 subjects participated, including 56 faculty members and 61 resident physicians. Prior to the intervention, all participants received institution-mandated education on PPE use via an online video and supplemental materials. Participants completed a pretest skills assessment using a 21-item checklist of steps to correctly don and doff PPE. Participants were expected to meet a minimum passing score (MPS) of 100%, determined by an expert panel using the Mastery Angoff and Patient Safety standard-setting techniques. Participants that met the MPS on pretest were exempt from the educational intervention. Testing occurred before and after an in-person demonstration of proper donning and doffing techniques and 20 minutes of deliberate practice. The primary outcome was a change in assessment scores of correct PPE use following our educational intervention. Secondary outcomes included differences in performance scores between faculty members and resident physicians, and differences in performance during donning vs doffing sequences. RESULTS: All participants had a mean pretest score of 73.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.9-75.3%). Faculty member and resident pretest scores were similar (75.1% vs 71.3%, p = 0.082). Mean pretest doffing scores were lower than donning scores across all participants (65.8% vs 82.8%, p<0.001). Participant scores increased 26.9% (95% CI of the difference 24.7-29.1%, p<0.001) following our educational intervention resulting in all participants meeting the MPS of 100%. CONCLUSION: A mastery learning intervention with deliberate practice ensured the correct use of PPE by physician subjects in a simulated clinical encounter of a COVID-19 patient. Further study of translational outcomes is needed.

Applying Educational Theory and Best Practices to Solve Common Challenges of Simulation-based Procedural Training in Emergency Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Procedural competency is an essential prerequisite for the independent practice of emergency medicine. Multiple studies demonstrate that simulation-based procedural training (SBPT) is an effective method for acquiring and maintaining procedural competency and preferred over traditional paradigms ("see one, do one, teach one"). Although newer paradigms informing SBPT have emerged, educators often face circumstances that challenge and undermine their implementation. The goal of this paper is to identify and report on best practices and theory-supported solutions to some of these challenges as derived using a process of expert consensus building and reviews of the existing literature on SBPT. METHODS: The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Simulation Academy SBPT Workgroup convened approximately 8 months prior to the 2019 SAEM Annual Meeting to perform a review of the literature and participate in a consensus-building process to identify solutions (in the form of best practices and educational theory) to these challenges faced by educators engaging in SBPT. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS: Thirteen distinct educational challenges to SBPT emerged from the expert group's primary literature reviews and consensus-building processes. Three domains emerged upon further analysis of the 13 challenges: learner, educator, and curriculum. Six challenges within the "learner" domain were selected for comprehensive discussion in this paper, as they were deemed representative of the most common and most significant threats to ideal SBPT. Each of the six challenges aligns with one of the following themes: 1) maximizing active learning, 2) maintaining learner engagement, 3) embracing learner diversity, 4) optimizing cognitive load, 5) promoting mindfulness and reflection, and 6) emphasizing deliberate practice for mastery learning. Over 20 "special treatments" for mitigating the impact of the 13 challenges were derived from the secondary literature search and consensus-building process prior to and during the preconference workshop; 11 of these that best address the six learner-centered challenges are explored, including implications for educators involved in SBPT. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATORS: We propose multiple consensus-generated solutions (in the form of best practices and applied educational theory) that we believe are suitable and well aligned to overcome commonly encountered learner-centered challenges and threats to optimal SBPT.

Disaster Medicine: A Multi-Modality Curriculum Designed and Implemented for Emergency Medicine Residents.

OBJECTIVE: Few established curricula are available for teaching disaster medicine. We describe a comprehensive, multi-modality approach focused on simulation to teach disaster medicine to emergency medicine residents in a 3-year curriculum. METHODS: Residents underwent a 3-year disaster medicine curriculum incorporating a variety of venues, personnel, and roles. The curriculum included classroom lectures, tabletop exercises, virtual reality simulation, high-fidelity simulation, hospital disaster drills, and journal club discussion. All aspects were supervised by specialty emergency medicine faculty and followed a structured debriefing. Residents rated the high-fidelity simulations by using a 10-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Three classes of emergency medicine residents participated in the 3-year training program. Residents found the exercise to be realistic, educational, and relevant to their practice. After participating in the program, residents felt better prepared for future disasters. CONCLUSIONS: Given the large scope of impact that disasters potentiate, it is understandably difficult to teach these skills effectively. Training programs can utilize this simulation-based curriculum to better prepare the nation's emergency medicine physicians for future disasters. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2016;10:611-614).