Challenging Authority During an Emergency-the Effect of a Teaching Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Previous research has shown that residents were unable to effectively challenge a superior's wrong decision during a crisis situation, a problem that can contribute to preventable mortality. We aimed to assess whether a teaching intervention enabled residents to effectively challenge clearly wrong clinical decisions made by their staff. SUBJECTS AND INTERVENTION: Following ethics board approval, second year residents were randomized to a teaching intervention targeting cognitive skills needed to challenge a superior's decision, or a control group receiving general crisis management instruction. Two weeks later, subjects participated in a simulated crisis that presented them with opportunities to challenge clearly wrong decisions in a can't-intubate-can't-ventilate scenario. It was only disclosed that the staff was a confederate during the debriefing. Performances were video recorded and assessed by two raters blinded to group allocation using the modified Advocacy-Inquiry Score. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fifty residents completed the study. The interrater reliability of the modified Advocacy-Inquiry Scores (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.87) was excellent. The median (interquartile range) best modified Advocacy-Inquiry Score was significantly better in the intervention group 5.0 (4.50-5.62 [4-6]) than in the control group 3.5 (3.0-4.75 [3-6]) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A short targeted teaching intervention was effective in significantly improving residents' ability to challenge a wrong decision by a superior. This suggests that residents are not given the proper tools to challenge authority during a life-threatening crisis situation. This educational gap can have significant implications for patients' safety.

Bringing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery to the NICU: An Implementation Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines are bundled evidence-informed recommendations implemented to improve quality and safety of perioperative care. This study aims to determine feasibility of NICU implementation of an ERAS Guideline for Intestinal Resection, describing clinical outcomes and adherence to recommendations following light-touch implementation. METHODS: Infants <28 days undergoing laparotomy for intestinal resection in a closed-NICU were prospectively enrolled. Exclusion criteria included prematurity (<32wks), instability, or major comorbidity. Clinical data reflecting 13 ERAS recommendations were collected through chart review. Descriptive statistics are presented as median [interquartile range]. Thirty-day post-discharge outcomes include NICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), ventilator days, surgical site infection (SSI), re-intubation, readmission, reoperation, and mortality. Adherence was calculated as the percentage of patients eligible for each recommendation whose care was adherent. RESULTS: Ten infant-parent dyads were enrolled (five females; GA 37 weeks [35, 38.8]; birthweight 2.97 kg [2.02, 3.69]). Surgical diagnoses included intestinal atresia/web (n = 6), anorectal malformation (n = 3), and segmental volvulus (n = 1). NICU LOS was 16 days [11, 21], hospital LOS 20 days [18, 30], and 2.5 ventilator days/patient [2, 3]. There was reduced opioid use, no SSIs, one re-intubation, three readmissions, three reoperations, and no mortalities. Adherence to ERAS recommendations ranged 0-100 % with a pooled adherence rate of 73 %. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to introduce ERAS to the NICU with acceptable overall adherence. Assessing adherence was challenging for some measures. There were promising early clinical findings including a reduction in opioid use. This implementation trial will inform development of an ERAS protocol for surgical NICUs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (Cohort Study).

Developing implementation strategies to adopt Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Strong implementation strategies are critical to the success of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) guidelines, though little documentation exists on effective strategies, especially in complex clinical situations and unfamiliar contexts. This study outlines the process taken to adopt a novel neonatal ERAS® guideline. METHODS: The implementation strategy was approached in a multi-pronged, concurrent but asynchronous fashion. Between September 2019 and January 2020, healthcare providers from various disciplines and different specialties as well as parents participated in the strategy. Multidisciplinary teams were created to consider existing literature and local contexts including potential facilitators and/or barriers. Task forces worked collaboratively to develop new care pathways. An audit system was developed to record outcomes and elicit feedback for revision. RESULTS: 32 healthcare providers representing 9 disciplines and 5 specialties as well as 8 parents participated. Care pathways and resources were created. Elements recommended for a successful implementation strategy included identification of champions, multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement, consideration of local contexts and insights, patient/family engagement, education, and creation of an audit system. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary and structured process following principles of implementation science was used to develop an effective implementation strategy for initiating ERAS® guidelines.

Impact of Critical Event Checklists on Anaesthetist Performance in Simulated Operating Theatre Emergencies.

Introduction Crises in the operating theatre during a paediatric case are rare with the incidence of anesthesia-related cardiac arrest in non-cardiac patients being 1.4/10,000. In order to address this, the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) developed cognitive aids (CAs) in the form of Critical Event Checklists (SPA CECs). Several studies have demonstrated the benefit of CAs in improving performance of critical tasks. Despite the presence of CAs, individuals often do not use the aids consistently. The objective of our study was to investigate whether the presence of SPA CECs, and orientation to these tools, improve the performance of trainees during simulated critical events. Methods With local Research Ethics Board (REB) approval we used a randomized, 2 x 2 factorial design. The first randomization was the participant orientation to the SPA CECs (e-module vs. didactic). The second randomization assigned participants to complete the simulations with or without SPA CECs available. The simulations were videoed and rated by two raters using a scenario-specific checklist and global rating scale (GRS). Results We conducted 78 simulations. The SPA CEC was used in 17.9% of scenarios. The SPA CEC was used in 44.8% of diagnosis-based scenarios and only 2.0% of generic problem-based scenarios. Participants' performance was superior with the SPA CEC present (GRS mean 3 [SD 1.27]) than without the SPA CEC available (GRS mean 2.43 [SD 0.89]) (p = 0.048). Conclusion Overall, we showed that uptake of the SPA CECs is poor. We also demonstrated that when the SPA CECs are utilized, they enhance the performance of trainees in simulated operating room (OR) critical events.

Intraoperative ketorolac dose of 15mg versus the standard 30mg on early postoperative pain after spine surgery: A randomized, blinded, non-inferiority trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study is to show the non-inferiority of 15mg intraoperative dose of ketorolac as compared to the standard 30mg ketorolac by looking at the visual analog scale pain (VAS) scores 4h after an adult spine surgery. DESIGN: The study design is a prospective randomized non-inferiority clinical trial looking at non-inferiority of intraoperative 15mg ketorolac from the standard 30mg dose. SETTING: Quaternary care center. PATIENTS: 50 adult (18-65years of age) undergoing lumbar decompression spine surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Group A received a single intraoperative dose of 15mg ketorolac at the end of surgery and group B received single intraoperative dose of 30mg ketorolac. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores 4h after an adult spine surgery. Secondary measures were morphine usage in the first 8 and 24h postoperatively, numeric rating scores (NRS) up to 24h, sedation, nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, pruritus and bleeding complications. MAIN RESULTS: Intention to treat analysis showed a mean increase in 4h VAS pain score of 7.9mm (95% CI: -4.5mm to 20.4mm) in patients administered 15mg ketorolac. This difference was neither statistically (P=0.207) nor clinically significant (<18mm on VAS scale). A similar increase in the 15mg group was noted through a per protocol analysis, 6.9mm (95% CI: -6.6mm to 20.5mm, P=0.307) greater in the 15mg group. Non-inferiority of 15mg was not confirmed. No significant difference was found in secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Ketorolac 30mg intravenous was not superior to 15mg intravenous for post-operative pain management after spine surgery. However, 15mg failed to meet the pre-specified criteria for non-inferiority to the 30mg dose.