Enhancing Safety of a System-Wide In Situ Simulation Program Using No-Go Considerations.

INTRODUCTION: A large-scale in situ simulation initiative on cardiac arrest in pregnancy was implemented across NYC Health + Hospitals. In situ simulation must be safely balanced with clinical conditions such as through application of no-go considerations or standardized reasons to cancel or postpone the simulation. Our objective is to describe our findings on the application of no-go considerations during this simulation initiative. METHODS: NYC Health + Hospitals/Simulation Center developed an in situ simulation program focused on cardiac arrest in pregnancy, implemented at 11 acute care facilities. The program's toolkit included no-go considerations for in situ simulation safety: situations prompting a need to cancel, reschedule, or postpone a simulation to ensure patient and/or staff safety. RESULTS: Data were collected from June 2018 through December 2019. The simulation sites reviewed the 13 established no-go considerations before each simulation event to assess if the simulation was safe to "go". After the conclusion of the initiative, all data related to no-go considerations were analyzed.Two hundred seventy-four in situ simulations were scheduled and 223 simulations (81%) were completed. Fifty-one no-go events were reported, with 78% identifying a reason by category. Twenty-two percent did not report a reason or category. Four of the 13 suggested no-go considerations were not reported. CONCLUSIONS: The no-go considerations framework promotes standardized and strategic scheduling of in situ simulation. Analysis of no-go consideration application during this system-wide initiative provides a model for the usage of tracking no-go data to enhance safety and inform future simulation planning.

Rare large cell neuroendocrine tumor of the endometrium: A case report and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) of the endometrium is a rare malignancy with an aggressive course. Although data is limited to case reports, the prognosis appears to be poor, similar to other type II uterine cancers. A total of 12 cases of LCNEC of the uterus have been published to date. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 71 year-old woman presented with postmenopausal vaginal bleeding. Endometrial biopsy was non-diagnostic for LCNEC. She underwent surgical debulking and staging of a 22cm endometrial tumor with omental metastasis and positive lymph nodes. Her final FIGO stage was IVB. DISCUSSION: We summarize all prior case reports of LCNEC of the endometrium and discuss the definition, presentation, imaging and surgical management. The pathology with immunohistochemical review, adjuvant therapy and prognosis of LCNEC of the endometrium are also reviewed. CONCLUSION: Pathologic findings and immunohistochemistry are essential in making a diagnosis of LCNEC of the endometrium. Primary debulking and surgical staging is typically performed, but if a diagnosis of LCNEC can be made preoperatively with immunohistochemistry, surgeons should consider neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to its high grade histology and aggressive course. Otherwise adjuvant chemotherapy is usually given. Even with early stage disease, the prognosis seems poor. Due to the rarity of this aggressive malignancy, more data is needed to establish incidence.