The Impact of a 22-Month Multistep Implementation Program on Speaking-Up Behavior in an Academic Anesthesia Department.

BACKGROUND: Speaking-up is a method of assertive communication that increases patient safety but often encounters barriers. Numerous studies describe programs introducing speaking-up with varying success; the common denominator seems to be the need for a multimodal and sustained approach to achieve the required change in behavior and culture for safer health care. METHODS: Before implementing a 22-month multistep program for establishing and strengthening speaking-up at our institution, we assessed perceived safety culture using the "Safety Attitudes Questionnaire." After program completion, participants completed parts of the same Safety Attitudes Questionnaire relevant to speaking-up, and preresult and postresult were compared. In addition, levels of speaking-up and assertive communication were compared with a Swiss benchmark using results from the "Speaking-up About Patient Safety Questionnaire." RESULTS: Safety Attitudes Questionnaire scores were significantly higher after program completion in 2 of 3 answered questions (median [first quartile, third quartile), 5.0 [4.0, 5.0] versus 4.0 [4.0, 5.0], P = 0.0002, and 5.0 [4.0, 5.0] versus 4.0 [4.0, 4.0] P = 0.002; n = 34). Our composite score on the Speaking-up About Patient Safety Questionnaire was significantly higher (mean ± SD, 5.9 ± 0.7 versus 5.2 ± 1.0; P < 0.001) than the benchmark (n = 65). CONCLUSIONS: A long-term multimodal program for speaking-up was successfully implemented. Attitude and climate toward safety generally improved, and postprogram perceived levels of assertive communication and speaking-up were higher than the benchmark. These results support current opinion that multimodal programs and continued effort are required, but that speaking-up can indeed be strengthened.

A mobile application to facilitate implementation of programmatic assessment in anaesthesia training.

BACKGROUND: Programmatic assessment is a concept to support learning through continuously providing information about learner progress to trainees and supervisors. Central to the concept are multiple low-stakes workplace-based assessments and meaningful feedback opportunities. Mobile technology may facilitate frequent and concise workplace-based assessments and trigger meaningful feedback. We designed a mobile application (app) for real-time use at the workplace utilising the concept of entrustable professional activities. As the primary outcome, we analysed completion times and as the secondary outcome the quality of documented learning goals. METHODS: The prEPAred app requests trainees and supervisors to rate level of supervision of a professional activity directly after completion. Subsequently, ratings are compared, and supervisors may provide feedback via the app. We tested the app in five anaesthesiology departments at major teaching hospitals, analysing completion times, agreement on ratings, and quality of documented learning goals. RESULTS: We recorded 1518 assessments from 159 trainees and 89 supervisors. Median time for level of supervision rating was 56 (inter-quartile range: 39-85) s for trainees and 17 (11-30) s for supervisors. Learning goals via the app were documented in 767 cases (50.5%). Median feedback time was 2 min, 31 s (confidence interval [CI]: 1 min, 20 s to 5 min, 20 s). In 443 (29%) cases, a specific learning goal was documented. A post hoc analysis revealed that the odds of documenting learning goals increased if trainees rated the level of supervision higher than their supervisors (odds ratio 1.39; CI: 1.03-1.87). CONCLUSIONS: The prEPAred mobile app enabled frequent and concise documentation of workplace-based assessments. Disagreement in level of supervision rating stimulated documentation of specific learning goals indicating more meaningful feedback. Thus, the tool could advance workplace-based assessments towards programmatic assessment.

Simulation With PARTS (Phase-Augmented Research and Training Scenarios): A Structure Facilitating Research and Assessment in Simulation.

INTRODUCTION: Assessment in simulation is gaining importance, as are scenario design methods increasing opportunity for assessment. We present our approach to improving measurement in complex scenarios using PARTS [Phase-Augmented Research and Training Scenarios], essentially separating cases into clearly delineated phases. METHODS: We created 7 PARTS with real-time rating instruments and tested these in 63 cases during 4 weeks of simulation. Reliability was tested by comparing real-time rating with postsimulation video-based rating using the same instrument. Validity was tested by comparing preintervention and postintervention total results, by examining the difference in improvement when focusing on the phase-specific results addressed by the intervention, and further explored by trying to demonstrate the discrete improvement expected from proficiency in the rare occurrence of leader inclusive behavior. RESULTS: Intraclass correlations [3,1] between real-time and postsimulation ratings were 0.951 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.794-0.990), 1.00 (95% CI, --to--), 0.948 (95% CI, 0.783-0.989), and 0.995 (95% CI, 0.977-0.999) for 3 phase-specific scores and total scenario score, respectively. Paired t tests of prelecture-postlecture performance showed an improvement of 14.26% (bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap [BCa] 95% CI, 4.71-23.82; P = 0.009) for total performance but of 28.57% (BCa 95% CI, 13.84-43.30; P = 0.002) for performance in the respective phase. The correlation of total scenario performance with leader inclusiveness was not significant (rs = 0.228; BCa 95% CI. -0.082 to 0.520; P = 0.119) but significant for specific phase performance (rs = 0.392; BCa 95% CI, 0.118-0.632; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The PARTS allowed for improved reliability and validity of measurements in complex scenarios.