Interprofessional collaboration between health professional learners when breaking bad news: a scoping review of teaching approaches.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review was to examine teaching approaches used to teach interprofessional health professional learners how to break bad news collaboratively. INTRODUCTION: When breaking bad news, health professionals must be equipped to deliver it skillfully and collaboratively; however, the literature shows that this skill receives little attention in program curricula. Consequently, health professionals can feel inadequately prepared to deliver bad news, which may lead to increased burnout, distress, and compassion fatigue. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies that describe teaching approaches used to teach learners how to break bad news collaboratively were considered for inclusion. Studies must have included 2 or more undergraduate and/or postgraduate learners working toward a professional health or social care qualification/degree at a university or college. Studies including lay, complementary and alternative, or non-health/social care learners were excluded. Due to the primary language of the research team, only English articles were included. METHODS: The JBI 3-step process was followed for developing the search. Databases searched included MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase, Education Resource Complete (EBSCOhost), and Social Work Abstracts (EBSCOhost). The initial search was conducted on February 11, 2021, and was updated on May 17, 2022. Title and abstract screening and data extraction were completed by 2 independent reviewers. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or with a third reviewer. Results are presented in tabular or diagrammatic format, together with a narrative summary. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the scoping review, with a range of methodologies and designs (pre/post surveys, qualitative, feasibility, mixed methods, cross-sectional, quality improvement, and methodological triangulation). The majority of papers were from the United States (n=8; 61.5%). All but 1 study used simulation-enhanced interprofessional education as the preferred method to teach interprofessional cohorts of learners how to break bad news. The bulk of simulations were face-to-face (n=11; 84.6%). Three studies (23.1%) were reported as high fidelity, while the remainder did not disclose fidelity. All studies that used simulation to teach students how to break bad news utilized simulated participants/patients to portray patients and/or family in the simulations. The academic level of participants varied, with the majority noted as undergraduate (n=7; 53.8%); 3 studies (23.1%) indicated a mix of undergraduate and graduate participants, 2 (15.4%) were graduate only, and 1 (7.7%) was not disclosed. There was a range of health professional programs represented by participants, with medicine and nursing equally in the majority (n=10; 76.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-enhanced interprofessional education was the most reported teaching approach to teach interprofessional cohorts of students how to break bad news collaboratively. Inconsistencies were noted in the language used to describe bad news, use of breaking bad news and interprofessional competency frameworks, and integration of interprofessional education and simulation best practices. Further research should focus on other interprofessional approaches to teaching how to break bad news; how best to incorporate interprofessional competencies into interprofessional breaking bad news education; whether interprofessional education is enhancing collaborative breaking bad news; and whether what is learned about breaking bad news is being retained over the long-term and incorporated into practice. Future simulation-specific research should explore whether and how the Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best Practice are being implemented and whether simulation is resulting in student satisfaction and enhanced learning.

Interprofessional collaboration between health professional learners when breaking bad news: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to examine pedagogies used to teach interprofessional health learners how to break bad news collaboratively. INTRODUCTION: Breaking bad news is a skill health care professionals must be equipped to deliver well, yet literature shows that this skill receives little attention in program curricula. Consequently, health care professionals feel inadequately prepared to deliver bad news, leading to greater burnout, distress, and fatigue. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies that describe pedagogies used to teach breaking bad news will be considered for inclusion. Studies must include two or more undergraduate and/or postgraduate learners working towards a professional health or social care qualification or degree at a university or college. Studies including lay, complementary and alternative, or non-health or social care professional learners will be excluded. METHODS: The JBI three-step process will be followed for developing the search. Databases to be searched include MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Education Resource Centre, and Social Work Abstracts. Title and abstract screening through to data extraction will be completed by two independent reviewers and any disagreements will be resolved through discussion, or with a third reviewer. Results will be presented in tabular or diagrammatic form, together with a narrative summary.

Emergency medicine airway leads: a rapid response distributed educational model for emergency department COVID-19 airway management.

With the first case of COVID-19 confirmed in Canada in early 2020, our country joined in the fight against a novel pathogen in a global pandemic. The stress of uncertainty and practice change was most apparent in the emergency department when it came to managing known or suspected COVID-19 patients requiring airway management. Recognizing the need for a coordinated approach, a province wide rapid response distributed model of continuing professional development for airway management was developed utilizing Airway Leads to help prepare front-line medical personnel providing airway management for these patients. Airway Leads worked with local physicians to deliver consistent, high quality airway education across the province during the initial surge of cases. Education included both in person and virtual sessions along with real time ongoing support through provincial guidelines, videos, and other documents. Physician reported "stress level" pre- and post-Airway Lead support declined from a median score of 9 to 7 (on a 10-point Likert Scale).

RéSUMé: Le premier cas de COVID-19 ayant été confirmé au Canada au début de 2020, notre pays s'est joint à la lutte contre un nouveau pathogène dans une pandémie mondiale. Le stress de l'incertitude et du changement de pratique était plus évident au service d'urgence lorsqu'il s'agissait de gérer les patients connus ou soupçonnés de la COVID-19 qui avaient besoin d'une prise en charge des voies respiratoires. Reconnaissant la nécessité d'une approche coordonnée, un modèle de développement professionnel continu distribué à l'échelle de la province pour la gestion des voies aériennes a été élaboré en utilisant les Airway Leads pour aider à préparer le personnel médical de première ligne qui assure la gestion des voies aériennes de ces patients. Airway Leads a travaillé avec les médecins locaux pour dispenser un enseignement cohérent et de haute qualité sur les voies aériennes dans toute la province lors de l'augmentation initiale du nombre de cas. L'éducation comprenait à la fois des sessions en personne et virtuelles ainsi qu'un soutien continu en temps réel par le biais de directives provinciales, de vidéos et d'autres documents. Le "niveau de stress" déclaré par le médecin avant et après l'intervention de Airway Lead a diminué, passant d'un score médian de 9 à 7 (sur une échelle de Likert de 10 points).

Evaluation of a National Competency-Based Assessment System in Emergency Medicine: A CanDREAM Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, Canadian postgraduate emergency medicine (EM) programs began implementing a competency-based medical education (CBME) assessment program. Studies evaluating these programs have focused on broad outcomes using data from national bodies and lack data to support program-specific improvement. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the implementation of a CBME assessment program within and across programs to identify successes and opportunities for improvement at the local and national levels. METHODS: Program-level data from the 2018 resident cohort were amalgamated and analyzed. The number of entrustable professional activity (EPA) assessments (overall and for each EPA) and the timing of resident promotion through program stages were compared between programs and to the guidelines provided by the national EM specialty committee. Total EPA observations from each program were correlated with the number of EM and pediatric EM rotations. RESULTS: Data from 15 of 17 (88%) programs containing 9842 EPA observations from 68 of 77 (88%) EM residents in the 2018 cohort were analyzed. Average numbers of EPAs observed per resident in each program varied from 92.5 to 229.6, correlating with the number of blocks spent on EM and pediatric EM (r = 0.83, P < .001). Relative to the specialty committee's guidelines, residents were promoted later than expected (eg, one-third of residents had a 2-month delay to promotion from the first to second stage) and with fewer EPA observations than suggested. CONCLUSIONS: There was demonstrable variation in EPA-based assessment numbers and promotion timelines between programs and with national guidelines.

Radiation Exposure From CT Scanning in the Resuscitative Phase of Trauma Care: A Level One Trauma Centre Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The initial management of a trauma patient often involves imaging in the form of x-rays, computed tomography (CT) and other radiographic studies, which expose the patient to ionizing radiation, an entity known to cause tissue injury and malignancy at high doses. The purpose of this study was to use a calculation-based method to determine the radiation exposure of trauma patients undergoing trauma team activation in a Canadian tertiary-care trauma centre. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted using the Nova Scotia Provincial Trauma Registry. All patients age 16 years old and over who underwent trauma team activation between March 1, 2008 and March 1, 2009 were included. Patients who died prior to imaging tests were excluded. Dose reports for each CT were used to calculate a whole-body radiation dose for each patient. RESULTS: There were 230 trauma team activations during the study period, of which 206 had CT imaging. Data were available for 162 patients. The mean whole-body radiation exposure for all patients was 24.4±10.3 mSv, which may correlate to one additional cancer death for every 100 trauma patients scanned. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma patients are exposed to significant amounts of radiation during their initial trauma work-up, which may increase the risk of fatal cancer. Clinicians who care for these patients must be aware of the radiation exposure, and take measures to limit radiation exposure of trauma patients.

A systematic review of ethanol and fomepizole use in toxic alcohol ingestions.

Objectives. The optimal antidote for the treatment of ethylene glycol or methanol intoxication is not known. The objective of this systematic review is to describe all available data on the use of ethanol and fomepizole for methanol and ethylene glycol intoxication. Data Source. A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted. Study Selection. Published studies involving the use of ethanol or fomepizole, or both, in adults who presented within 72 hours of toxic alcohol ingestion were included. Our search yielded a total of 145 studies for our analysis. There were no randomized controlled trials, and no head-to-head trials. Data Extraction. Variables were evaluated for all publications by one independent author using a standardized data collection form. Data Synthesis. 897 patients with toxic alcohol ingestion were identified. 720 (80.3%) were treated with ethanol (505 Me, 215 EG), 146 (16.3%) with fomepizole (81 Me, 65 EG), and 33 (3.7%) with both antidotes (18 Me, 15 EG). Mortality in patients treated with ethanol was 21.8% for Me and 18.1% for EG. In those administered fomepizole, mortality was 17.1% for Me and 4.1% for EG. Adverse events were uncommon. Conclusion. The data supporting the use of one antidote is inconclusive. Further investigation is warranted.