Why are critical event checklists not always used in the perioperative setting?: A retrospective survey.

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-02-28 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0314774
Anna Clebone, P Allan Klock, Ellen Y Choi, Avery Tung
{"title":"Why are critical event checklists not always used in the perioperative setting?: A retrospective survey.","authors":"Anna Clebone, P Allan Klock, Ellen Y Choi, Avery Tung","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0314774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>During surgery and anesthesia, life-threatening critical events, including cardiac arrest, may occur. By facilitating recall of key management steps, suggesting diagnostic possibilities, and providing dose and drug information, cognitive aids may improve clinician performance during such events. In actual clinical practice, however, cognitive aids may be available but inconsistently used. One possibility explaining aid non-use during critical events is a lack of familiarity with how cognitive aids may be helpful. We hypothesized that introduction of critical event cognitive aids along with implementation of cognitive aid resources would change the quantitative incidence of cognitive aid use and qualitative reasons for aid non-use. We surveyed members of an academic anesthesia department before and after implementation of critical event cognitive aid resources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All anesthesia clinicians at a single academic medical center were surveyed. Participants were surveyed both pre- and post-training with a focused program to introduce critical event cognitive aid resources. Incidences of and reasons for cognitive aid use and non-use were collected and analyzed. Survey responses were compared pre- and post-implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 64.5%. One-hundred eighty-five reasons for non-use were collected before the focused program and 149 after. Overall, 80% of clinicians had encountered at least one critical event during the study period and use of cognitive aids during all reported events was 7%. Six categories of reasons for non-use were identified: 'Not Available', 'Not Needed', 'No Time', 'Another Person In Charge', 'Used In Another Way', 'No Reason Given'. After implementation, a decrease in the number of respondents who cited availability and who cited 'another person running crisis,' as reasons for non-use was observed (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementation of cognitive aids for critical events in an academic anesthesia environment improved the perception of cognitive aid availability and decreased the number of subjects who chose to not use the aid due to another person running the crisis response. Looking at the multiple reasons for cognitive aid non-use may guide implementation, training, and design.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 2","pages":"e0314774"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11870359/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314774","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: During surgery and anesthesia, life-threatening critical events, including cardiac arrest, may occur. By facilitating recall of key management steps, suggesting diagnostic possibilities, and providing dose and drug information, cognitive aids may improve clinician performance during such events. In actual clinical practice, however, cognitive aids may be available but inconsistently used. One possibility explaining aid non-use during critical events is a lack of familiarity with how cognitive aids may be helpful. We hypothesized that introduction of critical event cognitive aids along with implementation of cognitive aid resources would change the quantitative incidence of cognitive aid use and qualitative reasons for aid non-use. We surveyed members of an academic anesthesia department before and after implementation of critical event cognitive aid resources.

Methods: All anesthesia clinicians at a single academic medical center were surveyed. Participants were surveyed both pre- and post-training with a focused program to introduce critical event cognitive aid resources. Incidences of and reasons for cognitive aid use and non-use were collected and analyzed. Survey responses were compared pre- and post-implementation.

Results: The response rate was 64.5%. One-hundred eighty-five reasons for non-use were collected before the focused program and 149 after. Overall, 80% of clinicians had encountered at least one critical event during the study period and use of cognitive aids during all reported events was 7%. Six categories of reasons for non-use were identified: 'Not Available', 'Not Needed', 'No Time', 'Another Person In Charge', 'Used In Another Way', 'No Reason Given'. After implementation, a decrease in the number of respondents who cited availability and who cited 'another person running crisis,' as reasons for non-use was observed (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Implementation of cognitive aids for critical events in an academic anesthesia environment improved the perception of cognitive aid availability and decreased the number of subjects who chose to not use the aid due to another person running the crisis response. Looking at the multiple reasons for cognitive aid non-use may guide implementation, training, and design.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为什么围手术期不总是使用关键事件检查表?回顾性调查。
在手术和麻醉过程中,可能会发生危及生命的关键事件,包括心脏骤停。通过促进关键管理步骤的回忆,提示诊断可能性,并提供剂量和药物信息,认知辅助可以提高临床医生在此类事件中的表现。然而,在实际的临床实践中,认知辅助可能是可用的,但使用不一致。在关键事件中不使用辅助工具的一种可能解释是,对认知辅助工具的作用不熟悉。我们假设,关键事件认知辅助的引入以及认知辅助资源的实施将改变认知辅助使用的定量发生率和不使用的定性原因。我们调查了一个学术麻醉科的成员在实施关键事件认知援助资源之前和之后。方法:对同一学术医疗中心的所有麻醉临床医生进行调查。参与者在训练前和训练后接受了一个重点项目的调查,以介绍关键事件认知援助资源。收集和分析认知辅助设备使用和不使用的发生率及原因。对实施前后的调查结果进行比较。结果:有效率为64.5%。在重点项目之前收集了185个不使用的理由,在重点项目之后收集了149个。总体而言,80%的临床医生在研究期间至少遇到过一次严重事件,在所有报告的事件中使用认知辅助工具的比例为7%。确定了六类不使用的原因:“不可用”、“不需要”、“没有时间”、“另一个负责人”、“以另一种方式使用”、“没有给出原因”。在实施后,观察到以可用性和以“另一个人处理危机”作为不使用原因的受访者数量减少(p结论:在学术麻醉环境中对关键事件实施认知辅助提高了对认知辅助可用性的感知,并减少了因另一个人处理危机反应而选择不使用辅助的受试者数量。查看不使用认知辅助的多种原因可以指导实施、培训和设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
期刊最新文献
Influences of azolla-derived biofertilizer and compost on soil chemical properties and rice growth in contaminated soil. How the characteristics of a virtual environment affects the perception of travel distance through it. Is it inside my head? Characterization of sound externalization in schizophrenia. Interoception in adolescence: Evidence from multidomain self-report of bodily sensations and cardiac behavioral measures. Injury patterns and cumulative injury burden among U.S. competitive fencers: A survey.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1