Howard A Schwid | PubMed Health

PubMed2002

Evaluation of anesthesia residents using mannequin-based simulation: a multiinstitutional study.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesia simulators can generate reproducible, standardized clinical scenarios for instruction and evaluation purposes. Valid and reliable simulated scenarios and grading systems must be developed to use simulation for evaluation of anesthesia residents. METHODS: After obtaining Human Subjects approval at each of the 10 participating institutions, 99 anesthesia residents consented to be videotaped during their management of four simulated scenarios on MedSim or METI mannequin-based anesthesia simulators. Using two different grading forms, two evaluators at each department independently reviewed the videotapes of the subjects from their institution to score the residents' performance. A third evaluator, at an outside institution, reviewed the videotape again. Statistical analysis was performed for construct- and criterion-related validity, internal consistency, interrater reliability, and intersimulator reliability. A single evaluator reviewed all videotapes a fourth time to determine the frequency of certain management errors. RESULTS: Even advanced anesthesia residents nearing completion of their training made numerous management errors; however, construct-related validity of mannequin-based simulator assessment was supported by an overall improvement in simulator scores from CB and CA-1 to CA-2 and CA-3 levels of training. Subjects rated the simulator scenarios as realistic (3.47 out of possible 4), further supporting construct-related validity. Criterion-related validity was supported by moderate correlation of simulator scores with departmental faculty evaluations (0.37-0.41, P < 0.01), ABA written in-training scores (0.44-0.49, < 0.01), and departmental mock oral board scores (0.44-0.47, P < 0.01). Reliability of the simulator assessment was demonstrated by very good internal consistency (alpha = 0.71-0.76) and excellent interrater reliability (correlation = 0.94-0.96; P < 0.01; kappa = 0.81-0.90). There was no significant difference in METI versus MedSim scores for residents in the same year of training. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous management errors were identified in this study of anesthesia residents from 10 institutions. Further attention to these problems may benefit residency training since advanced residents continued to make these errors. Evaluation of anesthesia residents using mannequin-based simulators shows promise, adding a new dimension to current assessment methods. Further improvements are necessary in the simulation scenarios and grading criteria before mannequin-based simulation is used for accreditation purposes.

Anaphylaxis↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Symptom-based, algorithmic approach for handling the initial encounter with victims of a potential terrorist attack.

OBJECTIVES: This study intended to create symptom-based triage algorithms for the initial encounter with terror-attack victims. The goals of the triage algorithms include: (1) early recognition; (2) avoiding contamination; (3) early use of antidotes; (4) appropriate handling of unstable, contaminated victims; and (5) provisions of force protection. The algorithms also address industrial accidents and emerging infections, which have similar clinical presentations and risks for contamination as weapons of mass destruction (WMD). METHODS: The algorithms were developed using references from military and civilian sources. They were tested and adjusted using a series of theoretical patients from a CD-ROM chemical, biological, radiological/nuclear, and explosive victim simulator. Then, the algorithms were placed into a card format and sent to experts in relevant fields for academic review. RESULTS: Six inter-connected algorithms were created, described, and presented in figure form. The "attack" algorithm, for example, begins by differentiating between overt and covert attack victims (A covert attack is defined by epidemiological criteria adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations). The attack algorithm then categorizes patients either as stable or unstable. Unstable patients flow to the "Dirty Resuscitation" algorithm, whereas, stable patients flow to the "Chemical Agent" and "Biological Agent" algorithms. The two remaining algorithms include the "Suicide Bomb/Blast/Explosion" and the "Radiation Dispersal Device" algorithms, which are inter-connected through the overt pathway in the "Attack" algorithm. CONCLUSION: A civilian, symptom-based, algorithmic approach to the initial encounter with victims of terrorist attacks, industrial accidents, or emerging infections was created. Future studies will address the usability of the algorithms with theoretical cases and utility in prospective, announced and unannounced, field drills. Additionally, future studies will assess the effectiveness of teaching modalities used to reinforce the algorithmic approach.

Algorithms↗