BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning最新文献

This letter expands upon the three tenets of the Healthcare Simulation Manifesto-comprehensive safety, collaborative advocacy, and ethical leadership. To do this, we will discuss two key terms: 'essential' and 'autonomy' in relation to safety for standardized/simulated patients (SPs). In this time of crisis, simulationists must move the boundary of skills training previously accepted as safe for human beings, and leverage technology to ensure the highest level of safety achievable for our SPs.

Background: The evidence for the conventional wisdom that debriefing quality determines the effectiveness of learning in simulation-based training is lacking. We investigated whether the quality of debriefing in using simulation-based training in team training correlated with the degree of learning of participants.

Methods: Forty-two teams of medical and undergraduate nursing students participated in simulation-based training sessions using a two-scenario format with after-action debriefing. Observers rated team performance with an 11-item Teamwork Assessment Scales (TAS) instrument (three subscales, team-based behaviours (5-items), shared mental model (3-items), adaptive communication and response (3-items)). Two independent, blinded raters evaluated video-recorded facilitator team prebriefs and debriefs using the Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD) 8-item tool. Descriptive statistics were calculated, t-test comparisons made and multiple linear regression and univariate analysis used to compare OSAD item scores and changes in TAS scores.

Results: Statistically significant improvements in all three TAS subscales occurred from scenario 1 to 2. Seven faculty teams taught learners with all scores ≥3.0 (except two) for prebriefs and all scores $\ge$ 3.5 (except one) for debriefs (OSAD rating 1=done poorly to 5=done well). Linear regression analysis revealed a single statistically significant correlation between debrief engagement and adaptive communication and response score without significance on univariate analysis.

Conclusions: Quality of debriefing does not seem to increase the degree of learning in interprofessional education using simulation-based training of prelicensure student teams. Such a finding may be due to the relatively high quality of the prebrief and debrief of the faculty teams involved in the training.

Introduction: In the face of a rapidly advancing pandemic with uncertain pathophysiology, pop-up healthcare units, ad hoc teams and unpredictable personal protective equipment supply, it is difficult for healthcare institutions and front-line teams to invent and test robust and safe clinical care pathways for patients and clinicians. Conventional simulation-based education was not designed for the time-pressured and emergent needs of readiness in a pandemic. We used 'rapid cycle system improvement' to create a psychologically safe learning oasis in the midst of a pandemic. This oasis provided a context to build staff technical and teamwork capacity and improve clinical workflows simultaneously.

Methods: At the Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care in Prince of Wales Hospital, a tertiary institution, in situ simulations were carried out in the operating theatres and intensive care unit (ICU). The translational simulation design leveraged principles of psychological safety, rapid cycle deliberate practice, direct and vicarious learning to ready over 200 staff with 51 sessions and achieve iterative system improvement all within 7 days. Staff evaluations and system improvements were documented postsimulation.

Results/findings: Staff in both operating theatres and ICU were significantly more comfortable and confident in managing patients with COVID-19 postsimulation. Teamwork, communication and collective ability to manage infectious cases were enhanced. Key system issues were also identified and improved.

Discussion: To develop readiness in the rapidly progressing COVID-19 pandemic, we demonstrated that 'rapid cycle system improvement' can efficiently help achieve three intertwined goals: (1) ready staff for new clinical processes, (2) build team competence and confidence and (3) improve workflows and procedures.

Introduction: Learner workload during simulated team-based resuscitations is not well understood. In this descriptive study, we measured the workload of learners in different team roles during simulated paediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Methods: Paediatric emergency nurses and paediatric and emergency medicine residents formed teams of four to eight and randomised into roles to participate in simulation-based, paediatric resuscitation. Participant workload was measured using the NASA Task Load Index, which provides an average workload score (from 0 to 100) across six subscores: mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, performance, frustration and mental effort. Workload is considered low if less than 40, moderate if between 40 and 60 and high if greater than 60.

Results: There were 210 participants representing 40 simulation teams. 138 residents (66%) and 72 nurses (34%) participated. Team lead reported the highest workload at 65.2±10.0 (p=0.001), while the airway reported the lowest at 53.9±10.8 (p=0.001); team lead had higher scores for all subscores except physical demand. Team lead reported the highest mental demand (p<0.001), while airway reported the lowest. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation coach and first responder reported the highest physical demands (p<0.001), while team lead and nurse recorder reported the lowest (p<0.001).

Conclusions: Workload for learners in paediatric simulated resuscitation teams was moderate to high and varied significantly based on team role. Composition of workload varied significantly by team role. Measuring learner workload during simulated resuscitations allows improved processes and choreography to optimise workload distribution.

Psychological safety is valued in other high-risk industries as an essential element to ensure safety. Yet, in healthcare, psychological safety is not mandatorily measured, quantified, or reported as an independent measure of safety. All members of the healthcare team's voice and safety are important. Calls for personal, physical or patient safety should never be disregarded or met with retaliation.