Improving Safety Recommendations Before Implementation: A Simulation-Based Event Analysis to Optimize Interventions Designed to Prevent Recurrence of Adverse Events.

INTRODUCTION: Pediatric inpatients are at high risk of adverse events (AE). Traditionally, root cause analysis was used to analyze AEs and identify recommendations for change. Simulation-based event analysis (SBEA) is a protocol that systematically reviews AEs by recreating them using in situ simulated patients, to understand clinician decision making, improve error discovery, and, through guided sequential debriefing, recommend interventions for error prevention. Studies suggest that these interventions are rarely tested before dissemination. This study investigates the use of simulation to optimize recommendations generated from SBEA before implementation. METHODS: Recommendations and interventions developed through SBEA of 2 hospital-based AEs (event A: error of commission; event B: error of detection) were tested using in situ simulation. Each scenario was repeated 8 times. Interventions were modified based on participant feedback until the error stopped occurring and data saturation was reached. RESULTS: Data saturation was reached after 6 simulations for both scenarios. For scenario A, a critical error was repeated during the first 2 scenarios using the initial interventions. After modifications, errors were corrected or mitigated in the remaining 6 scenarios. For scenario B, 1 intervention, the nursing checklist, had the highest impact, decreasing average time to error detection to 6 minutes. Based on feedback from participants, changes were made to all but one of the original proposed interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Even interventions developed through improved analysis techniques, like SBEA, require testing and modification. Simulation optimizes interventions and provides opportunity to assess efficacy in real-life settings with clinicians before widespread implementation.

Simulation-Based Event Analysis Improves Error Discovery and Generates Improved Strategies for Error Prevention.

INTRODUCTION: An adverse event (AE) is a negative consequence of health care that results in unintended injury or illness. The study investigates whether simulation-based event analysis is different from traditional event analysis in uncovering root causes and generating recommendations when analyzing AEs in hospitalized children. METHODS: Two simulation scenarios were created based on real-life AEs identified through the hospital's Safety Reporting System. Scenario A involved an error of commission (inpatient drug error) and scenario B involved detecting an error that already occurred (drug infusion error). Each scenario was repeated 5 times with different, voluntary clinicians. Content analysis, using deductive and inductive approaches to coding, was used to analyze debriefing data. Causes and recommendations were compiled and compared with the traditional event analysis. RESULTS: Errors were reproduced in 60% (3/5) of scenario A. In scenario B, participants identified the error in 100% (5/5) of simulations (average time to error detection = 15 minutes). Debriefings identified reasons for errors including product labeling, memory aid interpretation, and lack of standard work for patient handover. To prevent error, participants suggested improved drug labeling, specialized drug kits, alert signs, and handoff checklists. Compared with traditional event analysis, simulation-based event analysis revealed unique causes for error and new recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Using simulation to analyze AEs increased unique error discovery and generated new recommendations. This method is different from traditional event analysis because of the immediate clinician debriefings in the clinical environment. Hospitals should consider simulation-based event analysis as an important addition to the traditional process.

Development and pilot of an interprofessional pediatric resuscitation program for non-acute care inpatient providers.

Multiprofessional ward healthcare providers are generally unprepared to assemble and engage in the initial resuscitation of pediatric inpatients. This is important as the performance of these first-responders, in the several minutes prior to the arrival of acute care support, may have significant effects on overall patient outcome. Accordingly, we aimed to develop and pilot a training program intended for non-acute care inpatient providers, relevant to their working context. Using the latest theory and evidence in medical education, we created an interprofessional, entirely in-situ, simulation-based small-group activity. The activity was then piloted for four months with the goals of assessing perceived usefulness, as well as implementation factors such as participant accessibility and overall resource requirements. A total of 37 interprofessional (physician and nursing) staff were trained in 16 small group sessions over four months. Post-participation questionnaires revealed that the activity was perceived to be highly useful for their practice; especially the rapid cycle deliberate practice instructional method, and the increased focus on crisis resource management. Resource requirements were comparable to, and perhaps less than, existing acute care training programs. This project describes the preliminary steps taken in creating a curriculum intended to improve interprofessional resuscitation performance across an institution.