RESUMEN
Introduction Vasopressor administration is a critical medical intervention for patients with hypotension in undifferentiated shock states. Over the years, prehospital care has advanced with protocols and training that allow paramedics in the field to administer a variety of vasopressors. The primary objective of this investigation was to evaluate vasopressor experience among paramedics with regard to preference as well as the barriers to its preparation and administration. Methods A cross-sectional survey of vasopressor use by nationally certified paramedics (NRPs) was performed. A 20-item questionnaire was constructed to capture the prehospital perceptions and barriers of dopamine infusion, norepinephrine infusion, and IV bolus "push-dose" epinephrine (PD-E). Data collection was carried out from June to September 2021. Results A total of 44 responses were obtained (response rate = 44%). All participants had experience using vasopressors and understood their medical indications. Overall, PD-E was the most common vasopressor used in the prehospital setting, and participants felt equally confident in "using" and "preparing" it. Participants felt less confident with "using" and "preparing" vasopressors that required channel setup and maintaining a flow rate. Younger paramedics with less than five years of experience were more eager to use norepinephrine if trucks were stocked with pre-mixed norepinephrine rather than the current formulation that required compounding. Conclusion This study provided preliminary data that evaluated perceptions of vasopressor use in the prehospital setting among paramedics in a large urban environment. Preference and barriers to its preparation and administration were surveyed. Further research is needed to identify the interventions to reduce barriers and allow paramedics to be less limited by logistical considerations when choosing vasopressors in the prehospital setting.
RESUMEN
The day-to-day rigors of medical education often preclude learners from gaining a longitudinal perspective on who they are becoming. Furthermore, the current focus on competencies, coupled with concerning rates of trainee burnout and a decline in empathy, have fueled the search for pedagogic tools to foster students' reflective capacity. In response, many scholars have looked to the tradition of narrative medicine to foster "reflective spaces" wherein holistic professional identity construction can be supported. This article focuses on the rationale, content, and early analysis of the reflective space created by the narrative medicine-centered portfolio at the Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons. In January 2015, the authors investigated learning outcomes derived from students' "Signature Reflections," end-of-semester meta-reflections on their previous portfolio work. The authors analyzed the Signature Reflections of 97 (of 132) first-year medical students using a constant comparative process. This iterative approach allowed researchers to identify themes within students' writings and interpret the data. The authors identified two overarching interpretive themes-recognition and grappling-and six subthemes. Recognition included comments about self-awareness and empathy. Grappling encompassed the subthemes of internal change, dichotomies, wonder and questioning, and anxiety. Based on the authors' analyses, the Signature Reflection seems to provide a structured framework that encourages students' reflective capacity and the construction of holistic professional identity. Other medical educators may adopt meta-reflection, within the reflective space of a writing portfolio, to encourage students' acquisition of a longitudinal perspective on who they are becoming and how they are constructing their professional identity.
