Chest compressions performed by ED staff: a randomized cross-over simulation study on the floor and on a stretcher.

BACKGROUND: Multiple factors may contribute to the observed survival variability following in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). While in-hospital CPR is most often performed on patients lying on a bed or stretcher, CPR training uses primarily manikins placed on the floor. We analyzed the quality of external chest compressions (ECC) in simulated cardiac arrest scenarios occurring both on a stretcher and on the floor. METHODS: Prospective cross-over simulation study enrolling ED nurses and nurse's aides as part of an annual evaluation. Simulated CPR was performed in the 2 rescuer-mode for 2 min, both kneeling on the floor, and standing beside a knee high stretcher. The order of position was randomized. ECC parameters were compared. RESULTS: ED nurses (n=48) and nurse's aides (n=26) performed 128 scenarios. Mean ECC depth was 32 ± 13 mm on the floor and 27 ± 11 mm on a stretcher (∆: 5 mm, 95%CI [3-7], P<.001). Participants last trained within a year (n=17) developed deeper ECCs than their colleagues (n=47) in both positions (floor: 39 ± 12 mm vs stretcher: 34 ± 11 mm (p=0.016) for those trained within the year, and floor: 29 ± 12 mm vs stretcher: 24 ± 10 mm (P<.001) for those trained over a year ago). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of chest compressions performed by ED staff was below 2005 guideline standards, with decreased ECC depth during CPR on a stretcher. Annual refresher courses should be implemented in the ED, with a focus on obtaining required ECC depth while standing next to a stretcher.

Evaluation of patient simulator performance as an adjunct to the oral examination for senior anesthesia residents.

BACKGROUND: Patient simulators possess features for performance assessment. However, the concurrent validity and the "added value" of simulator-based examinations over traditional examinations have not been adequately addressed. The current study compared a simulator-based examination with an oral examination for assessing the management skills of senior anesthesia residents. METHODS: Twenty senior anesthesia residents were assessed sequentially in resuscitation and trauma scenarios using two assessment modalities: an oral examination, followed by a simulator-based examination. Two independent examiners scored the performances with a previously validated global rating scale developed by the Anesthesia Oral Examination Board of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Different examiners were used to rate the oral and simulation performances. RESULTS: Interrater reliability was good to excellent across scenarios and modalities: intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.77 to 0.87. The within-scenario between-modality score correlations (concurrent validity) were moderate: r = 0.52 (resuscitation) and r = 0.53 (trauma) (P < 0.05). Forty percent of the average score variance was accounted for by the participants, and 30% was accounted for by the participant-by-modality interaction. CONCLUSIONS: Variance in participant scores suggests that the examination is able to perform as expected in terms of discriminating among test takers. The rather large participant-by-modality interaction, along with the pattern of correlations, suggests that an examinee's performance varies based on the testing modality and a trainee who "knows how" in an oral examination may not necessarily be able to "show how" in a simulation laboratory. Simulation may therefore be considered a useful adjunct to the oral examination.

Nontechnical skills in anesthesia crisis management with repeated exposure to simulation-based education.

BACKGROUND: Critical incident reporting and observational studies have identified nontechnical skills that are vital to successful anesthesia crisis management. Examples of such skills include task management, team working, situation awareness, and decision making. These skills are not necessarily acquired through clinical experience and may need to be specifically taught. This study uses a high-fidelity patient simulator to assess the effect of repeated exposure to simulated anesthesia crises on the nontechnical skills of anesthesia residents. METHODS: After institutional research board approval and informed consent, 20 anesthesia residents were recruited. Each resident was randomized to participate as the primary anesthesiologist in the management of three different simulated anesthesia crises using a high-fidelity patient simulator. After each session, videotaped footage was used to facilitate debriefing of their nontechnical skills. The videotapes were later reviewed by two expert blinded independent assessors who rated each resident's nontechnical skills by using a previously validated and reliable marking system. RESULTS: : A significant improvement in the nontechnical skills of residents was demonstrated from their first to second session and from their first to third session (both P < 0.005). However from their second to third session, no significant improvement was observed. Interrater reliability between assessors was modest (single rater intraclass correlation = 0.53). CONCLUSION: A single exposure to anesthesia crises using a high-fidelity patient simulator can improve the nontechnical skills of anesthesia residents. However, an additional simulation session may confer little or no additional benefit.