Developing emotional preparedness and mental resilience through high-fidelity simulation: a 'bridge too far' for institutions teaching major trauma management and mass-casualty medicine?

BACKGROUND: Clinical acumen represents only part of being adequately equipped to attend a major incident. The emotive sights, sounds and smells of these dynamic environments are all-encompassing experiences, and responders must also be armed with the emotional preparedness to perform their clinical or managerial duties effectively, as well as the mental resilience to facilitate professional continuance. Despite this, limited training and a sparsity of evidence exists to guide developments within this domain. Historically, major incident training has focused on clinical theory acquisition, but irrespective of how comprehensive the learning materials, they are of little consequence if tandem steps to cultivate mental resilience and emotional preparedness are absent. High-Fidelity Simulation (HFS) has a growing reputation as an effective means of bridging important gaps between theory and practice. This pilot study aimed to measure student's self-reported perception of their readiness to respond to a major incident following a large-scale HFS. METHODS: Quantitative data was obtained from a sample of 108 students undertaking paramedic science, physician associate studies and adult nursing degree programmes. A bespoke questionnaire was developed to measure self-reported clinical acumen, mental and emotional preparedness. RESULTS: 91% of students agreed the combination of theoretical training and HFS provided made them feel clinically prepared to attend a real major incident; 86% agreed this experience had developed their mental resilience and 90% agreed that they felt emotionally prepared to attend a major incident. CONCLUSION: Within this pilot study, the blend of theoretical training and HFS contributed to self-reported clinical acumen, mental and emotional preparation, in learners training to work in disaster environments or emergency medicine settings.

Ambulance clinicians implementing evidence-based practice: mind the gap! Attitudes, perceptions and experiences of student paramedics.

Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) represents the conscientious and judicious use of the best contemporaneous evidence in partnership with patient values and clinical expertise to guide healthcare professionals. As a result, EBP is a recommended component of undergraduate education and considered fundamental for improving patient outcomes. EBP principles have thus become deeply rooted in higher education curricula, but only in recent years has this begun to permeate the world of paramedic practice. Despite this paradigm, the impact of EBP may be limited because ambulance clinicians may struggle with implementation, as a variety of barriers influence translation and application. Methods: A survey study aimed to gain insight into the epistemological and metacognitive barriers impacting student experience in order to help improve teaching and learning practices. Results: A sample of 64 students, across two different undergraduate paramedic science programmes, were recruited. Of these, 70% of BSc (Hons) students versus 33% of DipHE students agreed to some extent or greater that EBP represented minimal benefit in real-world practice due to Trust policy and the guidelines set out by the Joint Royal Colleges Ambulance Liaison Committee (Welch's t = 2.571, df = 26, p = 0.016 two-sided). Furthermore, 25% felt standard operating procedures negatively impacted their ability to implement EBP, and 39% reported their EBP learning had improved their ability to implement improved levels of patient care. Conclusion: A disparity between theoretical learning and EBP implementation was identified. EBP may not dovetail with standard operating procedure within UK ambulance Trusts, resulting in confusion among student paramedics as to the true worth of EBP.

An algorithm recommendation for the pharmacological management of allergic rhinitis in the UK: a consensus statement from an expert panel.

Allergic rhinitis is a frequent presenting problem in primary care in the UK, and has increased in prevalence over the last 30 years. When symptomatic, patients report significant reduction in their quality of life and impairment in school and work performance. Achieving adequate symptom control is pivotal to successful allergic rhinitis management, and relies mostly on pharmacotherapy. While it is recognised that most mild-moderate allergic rhinitis symptoms can be managed successfully in primary care, important gaps in general practitioner training in relation to allergic rhinitis have been identified. With the availability of new effective combination therapies, such as the novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate in a single device (Dymista®; Meda), the majority of allergic rhinitis symptoms can be treated in the primary care setting. The primary objective of this consensus statement is to improve diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis in primary care, and offer guidance on appropriate referral of difficult-to-treat patients into secondary care. The guidance provided herein outlines a sequential treatment pathway for allergic rhinitis in primary care that incorporates a considered approach to improve the management of allergic rhinitis symptoms and improve compliance and patient satisfaction with therapy. Adherence with this care pathway has the potential to limit the cost of providing effective allergic rhinitis management in the UK by avoiding unnecessary treatments and investigations, and avoiding the need for costly referrals to secondary care in the majority of allergic rhinitis cases. The fundamentals presented in this consensus article should apply in most health-care settings.