Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Surgery ; 172(5): 1330-1336, 2022 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36041927

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented challenges for simulation programs including American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network. American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network leadership were surveyed to identify opportunities to enhance patient safety through simulation. METHODS: Between January and June 2021, surveys consisting of 3 targeted domains: (I) Changing practice; (II) Contributions and recognition; and (III) Moving ahead were distributed to 100 American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and 54 American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network centers. Responses were combined and percent frequencies reported. RESULTS: Ninety-six respondents, representing 51 (51%) American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes, 17 (31.5%) American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network, and 28 dually accredited centers, completed the survey. Change of practice. Although 20.3% of centers stayed fully operational at the COVID-19 onset, 82% of all centers closed: 32% were closed less than 3 months, 28% were closed 3 to 6 months, 8% were closed 7 to 9 months, and 32% remained closed as of June 6, 2021. Most impacted activities were large-group instruction and team training. Sixty-nine percent of programs converted in-person to virtual programs. Contributions. The top reported innovative contributions included policies (80%), curricula (80%), and scholarly work (74%), Moving ahead. The respondents' top concerns were returning to high-quality training to best address learners' deficiencies and re-engagement of re-directed training programs. When asked "How the American College of Surgeons/American Society of Anesthesiologists Programs could best assist your simulation center goals?" the top responses were "facilitate collaboration" and "publish best practices from this work." CONCLUSION: The Pandemic presented multiple challenges and opportunities for simulation centers. Opportunities included collaboration between American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network to identify best practices and resources needed to enhance patient safety through simulation.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Cirurgiões , Anestesiologistas , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Currículo , Humanos , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos
2.
J Med Syst ; 43(1): 6, 2018 Nov 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30467609

RESUMO

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a dynamic electronic cognitive aid with embedded clinical decision support (dCA) versus a static cognitive aid (sCA) tool. Anesthesia residents in clinical anesthesia years 2 and 3 were recruited to participate. Each subject was randomized to one of two groups and performed an identical simulated clinical scenario. The primary outcome was task checklist performance with a secondary outcome of performance using the Anesthesia Non-technical skills (ANTS) scoring system. 34 residents were recruited to participate in the study. 19 residents were randomized to the sCA group and 15 to the dCA group. Overall inter-rater agreement for total checklist, malignant hyperthermia, hyperkalemia and ventricular fibrillation was 98.9%, 97.8%, 99.5% and 99.5% respectively with similar Kappa coefficient. Inter-rater agreement for ANTS partial ratings, however, was only 53.5% with a similar Kappa of 0.15. Mean performance was statistically higher in the dCA group versus the sCA group for total check list performance (15.70 ± 1.93 vs 12.95 ± 2.16, p < 0.0001). The difference in performance between dCA and sCA is most notable in dose-dependent related checklist items (4.60 ± 1.3 vs 1.89 ± 1.23, p < 0.0001), while the performance score for dose-independent checklist items was similar between the two groups (p = 0.8908). ANTS ratings did not differ between groups. In conclusion, we evaluated the use of a sCA versus a dCA with embedded decision support in a simulated environment. The dCA group was found to perform more checklist items correctly.Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov study #: NCT02440607.


Assuntos
Anestesiologia/educação , Lista de Checagem/instrumentação , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas/instrumentação , Internato e Residência/métodos , Treinamento por Simulação/métodos , Lista de Checagem/normas , Competência Clínica , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Cognição , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas/normas , Feminino , Processos Grupais , Humanos , Internato e Residência/normas , Masculino , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente , Treinamento por Simulação/normas
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA