RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the heart rate response to stress during airway intubations in clinical practice and a simulated environment. METHODS: Twenty-five critical care registrars participated in the study over a 3-month period. Heart rate data during intubations was recorded by a FitBit® Charge 2 worn by each participant during their clinical practice, and during a single simulated airway management scenario. The heart rate range was calculated by subtracting the baseline working heart rate (BWHR) from the maximum functional heart rate (MFHR). For each airway intubation performed participants recorded an airway diary entry. Data from intubations performed in the clinical environment was compared to data from a simulated environment. Heart rate changes were observed in two ways: percentage rise (median) across the 20-min intubation period and; percentage rise at point of intubation (median). RESULTS: Eighteen critical care registrars completed the study, mean age 31.8 years (SD = 2.015, 95% CI = 30.85-32.71). Throughout the 20-min peri-intubation recording period there was no significant difference in the median change in heart rates between the clinical (14.72%) and simulation (15.96%) environment (p = 0.149). At the point of intubation there was no significant difference in the median change in heart rate between the clinical (16.03%) and the simulation (25.65%) environment groups (p = 0.054). CONCLUSION: In this small population of critical care trainees, a simulation scenario induced a comparable heart rate response to the clinical environment during intubation. This provides evidence that simulation scenarios are able to induce a comparable physiological stress response to the clinical environment and thus facilitates effective teaching of a high-risk procedure in a safe manner.