Adapting Cognitive Task Analysis Methods for Use in a Large Sample Simulation Study of High-Risk Healthcare Events.

Cognitive task analysis (CTA) methods are traditionally used to conduct small-sample, in-depth studies. In this case study, CTA methods were adapted for a large multi-site study in which 102 anesthesiologists worked through four different high-fidelity simulated high-consequence incidents. Cognitive interviews were used to elicit decision processes following each simulated incident. In this paper, we highlight three practical challenges that arose: (1) standardizing the interview techniques for use across a large, distributed team of diverse backgrounds; (2) developing effective training; and (3) developing a strategy to analyze the resulting large amount of qualitative data. We reflect on how we addressed these challenges by increasing standardization, developing focused training, overcoming social norms that hindered interview effectiveness, and conducting a staged analysis. We share findings from a preliminary analysis that provides early validation of the strategy employed. Analysis of a subset of 64 interview transcripts using a decompositional analysis approach suggests that interviewers successfully elicited descriptions of decision processes that varied due to the different challenges presented by the four simulated incidents. A holistic analysis of the same 64 transcripts revealed individual differences in how anesthesiologists interpreted and managed the same case.

Decision-Making During High-Risk Events: A Systematic Literature Review.

Effective decision-making in crisis events is challenging due to time pressure, uncertainty, and dynamic decisional environments. We conducted a systematic literature review in PubMed and PsycINFO, identifying 32 empiric research papers that examine how trained professionals make naturalistic decisions under pressure. We used structured qualitative analysis methods to extract key themes. The studies explored different aspects of decision-making across multiple domains. The majority (19) focused on healthcare; military, fire and rescue, oil installation, and aviation domains were also represented. We found appreciable variability in research focus, methodology, and decision-making descriptions. We identified five main themes: (1) decision-making strategy, (2) time pressure, (3) stress, (4) uncertainty, and (5) errors. Recognition-primed decision-making (RPD) strategies were reported in all studies that analyzed this aspect. Analytical strategies were also prominent, appearing more frequently in contexts with less time pressure and explicit training to generate multiple explanations. Practitioner experience, time pressure, stress, and uncertainty were major influencing factors. Professionals must adapt to the time available, types of uncertainty, and individual skills when making decisions in high-risk situations. Improved understanding of these decisional factors can inform evidence-based enhancements to training, technology, and process design.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on American College of Surgeons-Accredited Education Institutes & American Society of Anesthesiologists-Simulation Education Network: Opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented challenges for simulation programs including American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network. American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network leadership were surveyed to identify opportunities to enhance patient safety through simulation. METHODS: Between January and June 2021, surveys consisting of 3 targeted domains: (I) Changing practice; (II) Contributions and recognition; and (III) Moving ahead were distributed to 100 American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and 54 American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network centers. Responses were combined and percent frequencies reported. RESULTS: Ninety-six respondents, representing 51 (51%) American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes, 17 (31.5%) American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network, and 28 dually accredited centers, completed the survey. Change of practice. Although 20.3% of centers stayed fully operational at the COVID-19 onset, 82% of all centers closed: 32% were closed less than 3 months, 28% were closed 3 to 6 months, 8% were closed 7 to 9 months, and 32% remained closed as of June 6, 2021. Most impacted activities were large-group instruction and team training. Sixty-nine percent of programs converted in-person to virtual programs. Contributions. The top reported innovative contributions included policies (80%), curricula (80%), and scholarly work (74%), Moving ahead. The respondents' top concerns were returning to high-quality training to best address learners' deficiencies and re-engagement of re-directed training programs. When asked "How the American College of Surgeons/American Society of Anesthesiologists Programs could best assist your simulation center goals?" the top responses were "facilitate collaboration" and "publish best practices from this work." CONCLUSION: The Pandemic presented multiple challenges and opportunities for simulation centers. Opportunities included collaboration between American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network to identify best practices and resources needed to enhance patient safety through simulation.

Communication failures contributing to patient injury in anaesthesia malpractice claims☆.

BACKGROUND: Communication amongst team members is critical to providing safe, effective medical care. We investigated the role of communication failures in patient injury using the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database. METHODS: Claims associated with surgical/procedural and obstetric anaesthesia and postoperative pain management for adverse events from 2004 or later were included. Communication was defined as transfer of information between two or more parties. Failure was defined as communication that was incomplete, inaccurate, absent, or not timely. We classified root causes of failures as content, audience, purpose, or occasion with inter-rater reliability assessed by kappa. Claims with communication failures contributing to injury (injury-related communication failures; n=389) were compared with claims without any communication failures (n=521) using Fisher's exact test, t-test, or Mann-Whitney U-tests. RESULTS: At least one communication failure contributing to patient injury occurred in 43% (n=389) out of 910 claims (κ=0.885). Patients in claims with injury-related communication failures were similar to patients in claims without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings (34% vs 26%; P=0.004). Fifty-two claims had multiple communication failures for a total of 446 injury-related failures, and 47% of failures occurred during surgery, 28% preoperatively, and 23% postoperatively. Content failures (insufficient, inaccurate, or no information transmitted) accounted for 60% of the 446 communication failures. CONCLUSIONS: Communication failure contributed to patient injury in 43% of anaesthesia malpractice claims. Patient/case characteristics in claims with communication failures were similar to those without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings.

Reliability of simulation-based assessment for practicing physicians: performance is context-specific.

INTRODUCTION: Even physicians who routinely work in complex, dynamic practices may be unprepared to optimally manage challenging critical events. High-fidelity simulation can realistically mimic critical clinically relevant events, however the reliability and validity of simulation-based assessment scores for practicing physicians has not been established. METHODS: Standardised complex simulation scenarios were developed and administered to board-certified, practicing anesthesiologists who volunteered to participate in an assessment study during formative maintenance of certification activities. A subset of the study population agreed to participate as the primary responder in a second scenario for this study. The physicians were assessed independently by trained raters on both teamwork/behavioural and technical performance measures. Analysis using Generalisability and Decision studies were completed for the two scenarios with two raters. RESULTS: The behavioural score was not more reliable than the technical score. With two raters > 20 scenarios would be required to achieve a reliability estimate of 0.7. Increasing the number of raters for a given scenario would have little effect on reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of practicing physicians on simulated critical events may be highly context-specific. Realistic simulation-based assessment for practicing physicians is resource-intensive and may be best-suited for individualized formative feedback. More importantly, aggregate data from a population of participants may have an even higher impact if used to identify skill or knowledge gaps to be addressed by training programs and inform continuing education improvements across the profession.

High-Fidelity Simulation Education and Crisis Resource Management.

This article explores high-fidelity simulation in anesthesiology education and provides strategies for its use to improve management of critical events. Educational theories that underlie the use of simulation are described. High-fidelity simulation is useful in teaching technical (diagnostic and procedural) and nontechnical (communication and professionalism) skills, including crisis resource management (CRM) skills. The practice of CRM is fundamental to ensuring patient safety during critical events and to the safe practice of anesthesiology, and its critical elements are presented. A discussion of the use of high-fidelity simulation to learn to combine highly complex procedural skills and CRM is also provided.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of resveratrol with glucose and malate (RGM) to slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease: A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Human studies on low-dose resveratrol are scarce. This study aims to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of an oral preparation of resveratrol, glucose, and malate (RGM) in slowing the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Thirty-nine subjects with mild to moderate AD who were free of life-threatening disease and who did not have contraindications to the use of the study product were screened. Progression of AD was measured by change in the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale. Secondary outcomes included Clinician's Global Impression of Change, Mini-Mental State Examination, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Scale, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory. 15 mL of the following preparation per dose, i.e., 5 g dextrose, 5 g malate, and 5 mg resveratrol, or matching placebo was ingested with an 8 oz glass of commercial unsweetened grape juice twice a day for 1 year. Group differences in the rate of change in the outcome measures were examined using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: The treatment and control groups were similar on all of the screening variables. At 12 months, change scores on Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale, Mini-Mental State Examination, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Scale, or Neuropsychiatric Inventory all showed less deterioration in the treatment than the control group; however, none of the change scores reached statistical significance. The most common AE were falls, all in the control group. None of the falls were deemed to be study related. CONCLUSION: Low-dose oral resveratrol is safe and well tolerated. Interpretation of the effects on clinical outcomes trajectories remains uncertain. A larger study is required to determine whether low-dose resveratrol may be beneficial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00678431), Registered 05/15/2008.

Use of Simulation in Performance Improvement.

Human error and system failures continue to play a substantial role in preventable errors that lead to adverse patient outcomes or death. Many of these deaths are not the result of inadequate medical knowledge and skill, but occur because of problems involving communication and team management. Anesthesiologists pioneered the use of simulation for medical education in an effort to improve physician performance and patient safety. This article explores the use of simulation for performance improvement. Educational theories that underlie effective simulation programs are described as driving forces behind the advancement of simulation in performance improvement.

Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods. METHODS: A total of 263 consenting board-certified anesthesiologists participating in existing simulation-based maintenance of certification courses at one of eight simulation centers were video recorded performing simulated emergency scenarios. Each participated in two 20-min, standardized, high-fidelity simulated medical crisis scenarios, once each as primary anesthesiologist and first responder. Via a Delphi technique, an independent panel of expert anesthesiologists identified critical performance elements for each scenario. Trained, blinded anesthesiologists rated video recordings using standardized rating tools. Measures included the percentage of critical performance elements observed and holistic (one to nine ordinal scale) ratings of participant's technical and nontechnical performance. Raters also judged whether the performance was at a level expected of a board-certified anesthesiologist. RESULTS: Rater reliability for most measures was good. In 284 simulated emergencies, participants were rated as successfully completing 81% (interquartile range, 75 to 90%) of the critical performance elements. The median rating of both technical and nontechnical holistic performance was five, distributed across the nine-point scale. Approximately one-quarter of participants received low holistic ratings (i.e., three or less). Higher-rated performances were associated with younger age but not with previous simulation experience or other individual characteristics. Calling for help was associated with better individual and team performance. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized simulation-based assessment identified performance gaps informing opportunities for improvement. If a substantial proportion of experienced anesthesiologists struggle with managing medical emergencies, continuing medical education activities should be reevaluated.

Frequency and Type of Situational Awareness Errors Contributing to Death and Brain Damage: A Closed Claims Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Situational awareness errors may play an important role in the genesis of patient harm. The authors examined closed anesthesia malpractice claims for death or brain damage to determine the frequency and type of situational awareness errors. METHODS: Surgical and procedural anesthesia death and brain damage claims in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database were analyzed. Situational awareness error was defined as failure to perceive relevant clinical information, failure to comprehend the meaning of available information, or failure to project, anticipate, or plan. Patient and case characteristics, primary damaging events, and anesthesia payments in claims with situational awareness errors were compared to other death and brain damage claims from 2002 to 2013. RESULTS: Anesthesiologist situational awareness errors contributed to death or brain damage in 198 of 266 claims (74%). Respiratory system damaging events were more common in claims with situational awareness errors (56%) than other claims (21%, P < 0.001). The most common specific respiratory events in error claims were inadequate oxygenation or ventilation (24%), difficult intubation (11%), and aspiration (10%). Payments were made in 85% of situational awareness error claims compared to 46% in other claims (P = 0.001), with no significant difference in payment size. Among 198 claims with anesthesia situational awareness error, perception errors were most common (42%), whereas comprehension errors (29%) and projection errors (29%) were relatively less common. CONCLUSIONS: Situational awareness error definitions were operationalized for reliable application to real-world anesthesia cases. Situational awareness errors may have contributed to catastrophic outcomes in three quarters of recent anesthesia malpractice claims.Situational awareness errors resulting in death or brain damage remain prevalent causes of malpractice claims in the 21st century.

A Taxonomy of Delivery and Documentation Deviations During Delivery of High-Fidelity Simulations.

INTRODUCTION: We developed a taxonomy of simulation delivery and documentation deviations noted during a multicenter, high-fidelity simulation trial that was conducted to assess practicing physicians' performance. Eight simulation centers sought to implement standardized scenarios over 2 years. Rules, guidelines, and detailed scenario scripts were established to facilitate reproducible scenario delivery; however, pilot trials revealed deviations from those rubrics. A taxonomy with hierarchically arranged terms that define a lack of standardization of simulation scenario delivery was then created to aid educators and researchers in assessing and describing their ability to reproducibly conduct simulations. METHODS: Thirty-six types of delivery or documentation deviations were identified from the scenario scripts and study rules. Using a Delphi technique and open card sorting, simulation experts formulated a taxonomy of high-fidelity simulation execution and documentation deviations. The taxonomy was iteratively refined and then tested by 2 investigators not involved with its development. RESULTS: The taxonomy has 2 main classes, simulation center deviation and participant deviation, which are further subdivided into as many as 6 subclasses. Inter-rater classification agreement using the taxonomy was 74% or greater for each of the 7 levels of its hierarchy. Cohen kappa calculations confirmed substantial agreement beyond that expected by chance. All deviations were classified within the taxonomy. CONCLUSIONS: This is a useful taxonomy that standardizes terms for simulation delivery and documentation deviations, facilitates quality assurance in scenario delivery, and enables quantification of the impact of deviations upon simulation-based performance assessment.

Performance gaps and improvement plans from a 5-hospital simulation programme for anaesthesiology providers: a retrospective study.

Background: Simulation is increasingly employed in healthcare provider education, but usage as a means of identifying system-wide practitioner gaps has been limited. We sought to determine whether practice gaps could be identified, and if meaningful improvement plans could result from a simulation course for anaesthesiology providers. Methods: Over a 2-year cycle, 288 anaesthesiologists and 67 certified registered nurse anaesthetists (CRNAs) participated in a 3.5 hour, malpractice insurer-mandated simulation course, encountering 4 scenarios. 5 anaesthesiology departments within 3 urban academic healthcare systems were represented. A real-time rater scored each individual on 12 critical performance items (CPIs) representing learning objectives for a given scenario. Participants completed a course satisfaction survey, a 1-month postcourse practice improvement plan (PIP) and a 6-month follow-up survey. Results: All recorded course data were retrospectively reviewed. Course satisfaction was generally positive (88-97% positive rating by item). 4231 individual CPIs were recorded (of a possible 4260 rateable), with a majority of participants demonstrating remediable gaps in medical/technical and non-technical skills (97% of groups had at least one instance of a remediable gap in communication/non-technical skills during at least one of the scenarios). 6 months following the course, 91% of respondents reported successfully implementing 1 or more of their PIPs. Improvements in equipment/environmental resources or personal knowledge domains were most often successful, and several individual reports demonstrated a positive impact on actual practice. Conclusions: This professional liability insurer-initiated simulation course for 5 anaesthesiology departments was feasible to deliver and well received. Practice gaps were identified during the course and remediation of gaps, and/or application of new knowledge, skills and resources was reported by participants.

Practice improvements based on participation in simulation for the maintenance of certification in anesthesiology program.

BACKGROUND: This study describes anesthesiologists' practice improvements undertaken during the first 3 yr of simulation activities for the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program. METHODS: A stratified sampling of 3 yr (2010-2012) of participants' practice improvement plans was coded, categorized, and analyzed. RESULTS: Using the sampling scheme, 634 of 1,275 participants in Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program simulation courses were evaluated from the following practice settings: 41% (262) academic, 54% (339) community, and 5% (33) military/other. A total of 1,982 plans were analyzed for completion, target audience, and topic. On follow-up, 79% (1,558) were fully completed, 16% (310) were partially completed, and 6% (114) were not completed within the 90-day reporting period. Plans targeted the reporting individual (89% of plans) and others (78% of plans): anesthesia providers (50%), non-anesthesia physicians (16%), and non-anesthesia non-physician providers (26%). From the plans, 2,453 improvements were categorized as work environment or systems changes (33% of improvements), teamwork skills (30%), personal knowledge (29%), handoff (4%), procedural skills (3%), or patient communication (1%). The median word count was 63 (interquartile range, 30 to 126) for each participant's combined plans and 147 (interquartile range, 52 to 257) for improvement follow-up reports. CONCLUSIONS: After making a commitment to change, 94% of anesthesiologists participating in a Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program simulation course successfully implemented some or all of their planned practice improvements. This compares favorably to rates in other studies. Simulation experiences stimulate active learning and motivate personal and collaborative practice improvement changes. Further evaluation will assess the impact of the improvements and further refine the program.

Simulation-based education with deliberate practice may improve intraoperative handoff skills: a pilot study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine the results of simulation-based education with deliberate practice on the acquisition of handoff skills by studying resident intraoperative handoff communication performances. DESIGN: Preinvention and postintervention pilot study. SETTING: Simulated operating room of a university-affiliated hospital. MEASUREMENTS: Resident handoff performances during 27 encounters simulating elective surgery were studied. Ten residents (CA-1, CA-2, and CA-3) participated in a one-day simulation-based handoff course. Each resident repeated simulated handoffs to deliberately practice with an intraoperative handoff checklist. One year later, 7 of the 10 residents participated in simulated intraoperative handoffs. All handoffs were videotaped and later scored for accuracy by trained raters. A handoff assessment tool was used to characterize the type and frequency of communication failures. The percentage of handoff errors and omissions were compared before simulation and postsimulation-based education with deliberate practice and at one year following the course. MAIN RESULTS: Initially, the overall communication failure rate, defined as the percentage of handoff omissions plus errors, was 29.7%. After deliberate practice with the intraoperative handoff checklist, the communication failure rate decreased to 16.8%, and decreased further to 13.2% one year after the course. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based education using deliberate practice may result in improved intraoperative handoff communication and retention of skills at one year.