Anesthesiologists' skills in emergency cricothyroidotomy mandate a brush-up training after 3 months-A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the Difficult Airway Society's 2015 "cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" guideline, the emergency cricothyroidotomy is the final option when managing an unanticipated difficult airway. How often training for maintenance of this skill is required for anesthesiologists remains unknown. We aimed to assess if specialist-trained anesthesiologists' skills improved from a brush-up intervention and if skills were retained after 3 months. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, participants were randomized to either a simulation-based brush-up or no brush-up. Both groups performed a mannequin-based technical skills emergency cricothyroidotomy test twice and were assessed by a blinded rater using a structured assessment tool that included time, positioning, palpation, appropriate employment of instruments, and stepwise progression. After 3 months of non-training, participants completed identical tests of retention. RESULTS: A total of 54 anesthesiologists were included from three hospitals in the Region of Southern Denmark. Thirty-seven percent of the participants had received skills training in emergency cricothyroidotomy in the prior 12 months. The intervention group (N = 27) performed better in the initial tests, with a mean time of 51.5 s (SD = 10.82), a total score per minute of 15.9 points (SD = 4.91), and 93% passing both initial tests compared to the control group (N = 27) with a mean time of 76.8 s (SD = 35.82), a total score per minute of 6.6 (SD = 4.68) and only 15% passing both initial tests. The intervention group managed to retain overall performance in retention tests in terms of performance time (48.9 s, p = .26), total score per minute (13.6 points, p = .094), and passing the tests (75%, p = .059). CONCLUSION: Exposure to simulation-based brush-up training in emergency cricothyroidotomy improved anesthesiologists' technical performance and was overall retained after 3 months. Some loss of skill concerning specific items was observed, highlighting the need for regular training in emergency cricothyroidotomy. Simulation-based training should be prioritized to improve and maintain technical skills in infrequent high-stakes procedures.

Consensus on technical procedures for simulation-based training in anaesthesiology: A Delphi-based general needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthesiologists are expected to master an increasing number of technical procedures. Simulation-based procedural training can supplement and, in some areas, replace the classical apprenticeship approach during patient care. However, simulation-based training is very resource-intensive and must be prioritised and optimised. Developing a curriculum for simulation-based procedural training should follow a systematic approach, eg the Six-Step Approach developed by Kern. The aim of this study was to conduct a national general needs assessment to identify and prioritise technical procedures for simulation-based training in anaesthesiology. METHODS: A three-round Delphi process was completed with anaesthesiology key opinion leaders. In the first round, the participants suggested technical procedures relevant to simulation-based training. In the second round, a needs assessment formula was used to explore the procedures and produce a preliminary prioritised list. In the third round, participants evaluated the preliminary list by eliminating and re-prioritising the procedures. RESULTS: All teaching departments in Denmark were represented with high response rates in all three rounds: 79%, 77%, and 75%, respectively. The Delphi process produced a prioritised list of 30 procedure groups suitable for simulation-based training from the initial 138 suggestions. Top-5 on the final list was cardiopulmonary resuscitation, direct- and video laryngoscopy, defibrillation, emergency cricothyrotomy, and fibreoptic intubation. The needs assessment formula predicted the final prioritisation to a great extent. CONCLUSION: The Delphi process produced a prioritised list of 30 procedure groups that could serve as a guide in future curriculum development for the simulation-based training of technical procedures in anaesthesiology.