Clinical reasoning in undergraduate paramedicine: utilisation of a script concordance test.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical reasoning is a complex cognitive and metacognitive process paramount to patient care in paramedic practice. While universally recognised as an essential component of practice, clinical reasoning has been historically difficult to assess in health care professions. Is the Script Concordance Test (SCT) an achievable and reliable option to test clinical reasoning in undergraduate paramedic students? METHODS: This was a single institution observational cohort study designed to use the SCT to measure clinical reasoning in paramedic students. Clinical vignettes were constructed across a range of concepts with varying shades of clinical ambiguity. A reference panel mean scores of the test were compared to that of students. Test responses were graded with the aggregate scoring method with scores awarded for both partially and fully correct responses. RESULTS: Eighty-three student paramedic participants (mean age: 21.8 (3.5) years, 54 (65%) female, 27 (33%) male and 2 (2%) non-binary) completed the SCT. The difference between the reference group mean score of 80 (5) and student mean of score of 65.6 (8.4) was statistically significant (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Clinical reasoning skills are not easily acquired as they are a culmination of education, experience and the ability to apply this in the context to a specific patient. The SCT has shown to be reliable and effective in measuring clinical reasoning in undergraduate paramedics as it has in other health professions such as nursing and medicine. More investigation is required to establish effective pedogeological techniques to optimise clinical reasoning in student and novice paramedics who are devoid of experience.

Airflow Characteristics in Aeromedical Aircraft: Considerations During COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The aeromedical transport of coronavirus patients presents risks to clinicians and aircrew. Patient positioning and physical barriers may provide additional protection during flight. This paper describes airflow testing undertaken on fixed wing and rotary wing aeromedical aircraft. METHODS: Airflow testing was undertaken on a stationary Hawker Beechcraft B200C and Leonardo Augusta Westland 139. Airflow was simulated using a Trainer 101 (MSS Professional A/S, Odense Sø, Syddanmark, Denmark) Smoke machine. Different cabin configurations were used along with variations in heating, cooling, and ventilation systems. RESULTS: For the Hawker Beechcraft B200C, smoke generated within the forward section of the cabin was observed to fill the cabin to a fluid boundary located in-line with the forward edge of the cargo door. With the curtain closed, smoke was only observed to enter the cockpit in very small quantities. For the Leonardo AW139, smoke generated within the cabin was observed to expand to fill the cabin evenly before dissipating. With the curtain closed, smoke was observed to enter the cockpit only in small quantities CONCLUSION: The use of physical barriers in fixed wing and rotary wing aeromedical aircraft provides some protection to aircrew. Optimal positioning of the patient is on the aft stretcher on the Beechcraft B200C and on a laterally orientated stretcher on the AW139. The results provide a baseline for further investigation into methods to protect aircrew during the coronavirus pandemic.