Mechanical Ventilation Training Curriculum for Pulmonary Critical Care Fellows during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Abstract

Background: Mechanical ventilation (MV) management is an essential skill for pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) fellows to master during training. The unprecedented emergence of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the need for advanced operator competency in MV to improve patients' outcomes.

Objective: We aimed to create a standardized case-based curriculum using a blended approach of high-fidelity simulation, rapid-cycle deliberate practice, video didactics, and hands-on small group sessions for rapid accumulation of knowledge and hands-on skills for PCCM fellows before caring for critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: The MV curriculum consisted of the following steps: 1) baseline written knowledge test with 15 multiple-choice questions covering MV, the latest evidence-based practices, and pathophysiology of COVID-19; 2) baseline confidence survey using a 5-point Likert scale; 3) a one-on-one session using a high-fidelity simulation manikin, a lung simulator, and a mechanical ventilator to test baseline competencies; 4) a structured debriefing tailored per fellow's 50-point competency assessment checklist from the simulation using rapid-cycle deliberate practice; 5) video didactics; 6) a hands-on session in small groups for basic knobology, waveforms, and modes of MV; 7) a one-on-one simulation reassessment session; 8) a written knowledge posttest; and 9) a post-training confidence survey using a 5-point Likert scale.

Results: Eight PCCM fellows completed the training. The mean multiple-choice question score increased from 7.4 ± 2.9 to 10.4 ± 2.4 (P < 0.05), and the simulation scores increased from 17.1 ± 4.4 to 30.8 ± 3.7 (P < 0.05). Comparing the simulation reassessment to the baseline, fellows showed significant improvement (P < 0.05) in assessing indications for MV; implementing rapid sequence intubation for patients with COVID-19; initiating MV and ventilator bundle per best practices; recognizing and managing mucous plugging, ventilator dyssynchrony, and evidence-based treatments for acute respiratory distress syndrome; and developing a care plan for proning. The post-training survey revealed improved learner confidence in all competencies.

Conclusion: This pilot MV curriculum using a blended approach was feasible and allowed PCCM fellows to significantly improve their knowledge and hands-on skills, allowing for the appropriate use of MV during the pandemic. Self-reported improvement scores further reinforced this. The emergent need for novice learners may again be necessary for future pandemic settings where standard training models requiring extensive training time are limited.