Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists
BACKGROUND:We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods. METHODS...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Anesthesiology (Philadelphia) 2017-09, Vol.127 (3), p.475-489 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 489 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 475 |
container_title | Anesthesiology (Philadelphia) |
container_volume | 127 |
creator | Weinger, Matthew B Banerjee, Arna Burden, Amanda R McIvor, William R Boulet, John Cooper, Jeffrey B Steadman, Randolph Shotwell, Matthew S Slagle, Jason M DeMaria, Samuel Torsher, Laurence Sinz, Elizabeth Levine, Adam I Rask, John Davis, Fred Park, Christine Gaba, David M |
description | BACKGROUND:We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods.
METHODS:A total of 263 consenting board-certified anesthesiologists participating in existing simulation-based maintenance of certification courses at one of eight simulation centers were video recorded performing simulated emergency scenarios. Each participated in two 20-min, standardized, high-fidelity simulated medical crisis scenarios, once each as primary anesthesiologist and first responder. Via a Delphi technique, an independent panel of expert anesthesiologists identified critical performance elements for each scenario. Trained, blinded anesthesiologists rated video recordings using standardized rating tools. Measures included the percentage of critical performance elements observed and holistic (one to nine ordinal scale) ratings of participant’s technical and nontechnical performance. Raters also judged whether the performance was at a level expected of a board-certified anesthesiologist.
RESULTS:Rater reliability for most measures was good. In 284 simulated emergencies, participants were rated as successfully completing 81% (interquartile range, 75 to 90%) of the critical performance elements. The median rating of both technical and nontechnical holistic performance was five, distributed across the nine-point scale. Approximately one-quarter of participants received low holistic ratings (i.e., three or less). Higher-rated performances were associated with younger age but not with previous simulation experience or other individual characteristics. Calling for help was associated with better individual and team performance.
CONCLUSIONS:Standardized simulation-based assessment identified performance gaps informing opportunities for improvement. If a substantial proportion of experienced anesthesiologists struggle with managing medical emergencies, continuing medical education activities should be reevaluated. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001739 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1915873176</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1915873176</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3569-b9e7eeabf707c154bd5526ed229a2080d5f90358b833440343c3c23a131a69a83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMtOwzAQtBAIyuMPEMqRS8CPOHaOpeIlFTgA58hJNtTgxOBNqPh7jFoQ4sBeVjuamR0NIYeMnjBaqNPp_PaE_hqmRLFBJkxynTKm5CaZRFSkgnK-Q3YRn-OppNDbZIfrXLGCigmBe9uNzgzW92llEJpkigiIHfRD4ttkWEByY3rzBN_ILNjB1sYl5-8RwaT6SM68CU1aQxhsa78sesAoROudf7I44D7Zao1DOFjvPfJ4cf4wu0rnd5fXs-k8rYXMi7QqQAGYqlVU1UxmVSMlz6HhvDCcatrINoaWutJCZBkVmahFzYVhgpm8MFrskeOV72vwb2MMUXYWa3DO9OBHLFnBpFaCqTxSsxW1Dh4xQFu-BtuZ8FEyWn4VXMaCy78FR9nR-sNYddD8iL4bjQS9Iiy9GyDgixuXEMoFGDcs_vf-BH6eh0s</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1915873176</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Weinger, Matthew B ; Banerjee, Arna ; Burden, Amanda R ; McIvor, William R ; Boulet, John ; Cooper, Jeffrey B ; Steadman, Randolph ; Shotwell, Matthew S ; Slagle, Jason M ; DeMaria, Samuel ; Torsher, Laurence ; Sinz, Elizabeth ; Levine, Adam I ; Rask, John ; Davis, Fred ; Park, Christine ; Gaba, David M</creator><creatorcontrib>Weinger, Matthew B ; Banerjee, Arna ; Burden, Amanda R ; McIvor, William R ; Boulet, John ; Cooper, Jeffrey B ; Steadman, Randolph ; Shotwell, Matthew S ; Slagle, Jason M ; DeMaria, Samuel ; Torsher, Laurence ; Sinz, Elizabeth ; Levine, Adam I ; Rask, John ; Davis, Fred ; Park, Christine ; Gaba, David M</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND:We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods.
METHODS:A total of 263 consenting board-certified anesthesiologists participating in existing simulation-based maintenance of certification courses at one of eight simulation centers were video recorded performing simulated emergency scenarios. Each participated in two 20-min, standardized, high-fidelity simulated medical crisis scenarios, once each as primary anesthesiologist and first responder. Via a Delphi technique, an independent panel of expert anesthesiologists identified critical performance elements for each scenario. Trained, blinded anesthesiologists rated video recordings using standardized rating tools. Measures included the percentage of critical performance elements observed and holistic (one to nine ordinal scale) ratings of participant’s technical and nontechnical performance. Raters also judged whether the performance was at a level expected of a board-certified anesthesiologist.
RESULTS:Rater reliability for most measures was good. In 284 simulated emergencies, participants were rated as successfully completing 81% (interquartile range, 75 to 90%) of the critical performance elements. The median rating of both technical and nontechnical holistic performance was five, distributed across the nine-point scale. Approximately one-quarter of participants received low holistic ratings (i.e., three or less). Higher-rated performances were associated with younger age but not with previous simulation experience or other individual characteristics. Calling for help was associated with better individual and team performance.
CONCLUSIONS:Standardized simulation-based assessment identified performance gaps informing opportunities for improvement. If a substantial proportion of experienced anesthesiologists struggle with managing medical emergencies, continuing medical education activities should be reevaluated.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-3022</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1175</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001739</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28671903</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Copyright by , the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Anesthesiologists - standards ; Anesthesiology - methods ; Anesthesiology - standards ; Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data ; Emergencies ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Manikins ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies ; Psychometrics ; Reproducibility of Results</subject><ispartof>Anesthesiology (Philadelphia), 2017-09, Vol.127 (3), p.475-489</ispartof><rights>Copyright © by 2017, the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3569-b9e7eeabf707c154bd5526ed229a2080d5f90358b833440343c3c23a131a69a83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3569-b9e7eeabf707c154bd5526ed229a2080d5f90358b833440343c3c23a131a69a83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28671903$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Weinger, Matthew B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banerjee, Arna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burden, Amanda R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McIvor, William R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boulet, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, Jeffrey B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steadman, Randolph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shotwell, Matthew S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slagle, Jason M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeMaria, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Torsher, Laurence</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinz, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levine, Adam I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rask, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Fred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Christine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaba, David M</creatorcontrib><title>Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists</title><title>Anesthesiology (Philadelphia)</title><addtitle>Anesthesiology</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND:We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods.
METHODS:A total of 263 consenting board-certified anesthesiologists participating in existing simulation-based maintenance of certification courses at one of eight simulation centers were video recorded performing simulated emergency scenarios. Each participated in two 20-min, standardized, high-fidelity simulated medical crisis scenarios, once each as primary anesthesiologist and first responder. Via a Delphi technique, an independent panel of expert anesthesiologists identified critical performance elements for each scenario. Trained, blinded anesthesiologists rated video recordings using standardized rating tools. Measures included the percentage of critical performance elements observed and holistic (one to nine ordinal scale) ratings of participant’s technical and nontechnical performance. Raters also judged whether the performance was at a level expected of a board-certified anesthesiologist.
RESULTS:Rater reliability for most measures was good. In 284 simulated emergencies, participants were rated as successfully completing 81% (interquartile range, 75 to 90%) of the critical performance elements. The median rating of both technical and nontechnical holistic performance was five, distributed across the nine-point scale. Approximately one-quarter of participants received low holistic ratings (i.e., three or less). Higher-rated performances were associated with younger age but not with previous simulation experience or other individual characteristics. Calling for help was associated with better individual and team performance.
CONCLUSIONS:Standardized simulation-based assessment identified performance gaps informing opportunities for improvement. If a substantial proportion of experienced anesthesiologists struggle with managing medical emergencies, continuing medical education activities should be reevaluated.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anesthesiologists - standards</subject><subject>Anesthesiology - methods</subject><subject>Anesthesiology - standards</subject><subject>Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Emergencies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Manikins</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><issn>0003-3022</issn><issn>1528-1175</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UMtOwzAQtBAIyuMPEMqRS8CPOHaOpeIlFTgA58hJNtTgxOBNqPh7jFoQ4sBeVjuamR0NIYeMnjBaqNPp_PaE_hqmRLFBJkxynTKm5CaZRFSkgnK-Q3YRn-OppNDbZIfrXLGCigmBe9uNzgzW92llEJpkigiIHfRD4ttkWEByY3rzBN_ILNjB1sYl5-8RwaT6SM68CU1aQxhsa78sesAoROudf7I44D7Zao1DOFjvPfJ4cf4wu0rnd5fXs-k8rYXMi7QqQAGYqlVU1UxmVSMlz6HhvDCcatrINoaWutJCZBkVmahFzYVhgpm8MFrskeOV72vwb2MMUXYWa3DO9OBHLFnBpFaCqTxSsxW1Dh4xQFu-BtuZ8FEyWn4VXMaCy78FR9nR-sNYddD8iL4bjQS9Iiy9GyDgixuXEMoFGDcs_vf-BH6eh0s</recordid><startdate>201709</startdate><enddate>201709</enddate><creator>Weinger, Matthew B</creator><creator>Banerjee, Arna</creator><creator>Burden, Amanda R</creator><creator>McIvor, William R</creator><creator>Boulet, John</creator><creator>Cooper, Jeffrey B</creator><creator>Steadman, Randolph</creator><creator>Shotwell, Matthew S</creator><creator>Slagle, Jason M</creator><creator>DeMaria, Samuel</creator><creator>Torsher, Laurence</creator><creator>Sinz, Elizabeth</creator><creator>Levine, Adam I</creator><creator>Rask, John</creator><creator>Davis, Fred</creator><creator>Park, Christine</creator><creator>Gaba, David M</creator><general>Copyright by , the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201709</creationdate><title>Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists</title><author>Weinger, Matthew B ; Banerjee, Arna ; Burden, Amanda R ; McIvor, William R ; Boulet, John ; Cooper, Jeffrey B ; Steadman, Randolph ; Shotwell, Matthew S ; Slagle, Jason M ; DeMaria, Samuel ; Torsher, Laurence ; Sinz, Elizabeth ; Levine, Adam I ; Rask, John ; Davis, Fred ; Park, Christine ; Gaba, David M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3569-b9e7eeabf707c154bd5526ed229a2080d5f90358b833440343c3c23a131a69a83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anesthesiologists - standards</topic><topic>Anesthesiology - methods</topic><topic>Anesthesiology - standards</topic><topic>Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Emergencies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Manikins</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Weinger, Matthew B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banerjee, Arna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burden, Amanda R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McIvor, William R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boulet, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, Jeffrey B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steadman, Randolph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shotwell, Matthew S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slagle, Jason M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeMaria, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Torsher, Laurence</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinz, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levine, Adam I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rask, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Fred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Christine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaba, David M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Anesthesiology (Philadelphia)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Weinger, Matthew B</au><au>Banerjee, Arna</au><au>Burden, Amanda R</au><au>McIvor, William R</au><au>Boulet, John</au><au>Cooper, Jeffrey B</au><au>Steadman, Randolph</au><au>Shotwell, Matthew S</au><au>Slagle, Jason M</au><au>DeMaria, Samuel</au><au>Torsher, Laurence</au><au>Sinz, Elizabeth</au><au>Levine, Adam I</au><au>Rask, John</au><au>Davis, Fred</au><au>Park, Christine</au><au>Gaba, David M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists</atitle><jtitle>Anesthesiology (Philadelphia)</jtitle><addtitle>Anesthesiology</addtitle><date>2017-09</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>127</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>475</spage><epage>489</epage><pages>475-489</pages><issn>0003-3022</issn><eissn>1528-1175</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUND:We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods.
METHODS:A total of 263 consenting board-certified anesthesiologists participating in existing simulation-based maintenance of certification courses at one of eight simulation centers were video recorded performing simulated emergency scenarios. Each participated in two 20-min, standardized, high-fidelity simulated medical crisis scenarios, once each as primary anesthesiologist and first responder. Via a Delphi technique, an independent panel of expert anesthesiologists identified critical performance elements for each scenario. Trained, blinded anesthesiologists rated video recordings using standardized rating tools. Measures included the percentage of critical performance elements observed and holistic (one to nine ordinal scale) ratings of participant’s technical and nontechnical performance. Raters also judged whether the performance was at a level expected of a board-certified anesthesiologist.
RESULTS:Rater reliability for most measures was good. In 284 simulated emergencies, participants were rated as successfully completing 81% (interquartile range, 75 to 90%) of the critical performance elements. The median rating of both technical and nontechnical holistic performance was five, distributed across the nine-point scale. Approximately one-quarter of participants received low holistic ratings (i.e., three or less). Higher-rated performances were associated with younger age but not with previous simulation experience or other individual characteristics. Calling for help was associated with better individual and team performance.
CONCLUSIONS:Standardized simulation-based assessment identified performance gaps informing opportunities for improvement. If a substantial proportion of experienced anesthesiologists struggle with managing medical emergencies, continuing medical education activities should be reevaluated.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Copyright by , the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</pub><pmid>28671903</pmid><doi>10.1097/ALN.0000000000001739</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-3022 |
ispartof | Anesthesiology (Philadelphia), 2017-09, Vol.127 (3), p.475-489 |
issn | 0003-3022 1528-1175 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1915873176 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Adult Anesthesiologists - standards Anesthesiology - methods Anesthesiology - standards Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data Emergencies Female Humans Male Manikins Middle Aged Prospective Studies Psychometrics Reproducibility of Results |
title | Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T17%3A14%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Simulation-based%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Management%20of%20Critical%20Events%20by%20Board-certified%20Anesthesiologists&rft.jtitle=Anesthesiology%20(Philadelphia)&rft.au=Weinger,%20Matthew%20B&rft.date=2017-09&rft.volume=127&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=475&rft.epage=489&rft.pages=475-489&rft.issn=0003-3022&rft.eissn=1528-1175&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/ALN.0000000000001739&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1915873176%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1915873176&rft_id=info:pmid/28671903&rfr_iscdi=true |