Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
2.
Paediatr Anaesth ; 32(9): 1024-1030, 2022 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1861512

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted clinician education. To address this challenge, our divisional difficult airway program (AirEquip) designed and implemented small-group educational workshops for experienced clinicians. Our primary aim was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a small-group, flexible-curriculum skills workshop conducted during the clinical workday. Secondary objectives were to evaluate whether our workshop increased confidence in performing relevant skills and to assess the work-effort required for the new program. METHODS: We implemented a 1:1 and 2:1 (participant to facilitator ratio) airway skills workshop for experienced clinicians during the workday. A member of the AirEquip team temporarily relieved the attendee of clinical duties to facilitate participation. Attendance was encouraged but not required. Feasibility was assessed by clinician attendance, and acceptability was assessed using three Likert scale questions and derived from free-response feedback. Participants completed pre and postworkshop surveys to assess familiarity and comfort with various aspects of airway management. A work-effort analysis was conducted and compared to the effort to run a previously held larger-format difficult airway conference. RESULTS: Fifteen workshops were conducted over 7 weeks; members of AirEquip were able to temporarily assume participants' clinical duties. Forty-seven attending anesthesiologists and 17 CRNAs attended the workshops, compared with six attending anesthesiologists and five CRNAs who attended the most recent larger-format conference. There was no change in confidence after workshop participation, but participants overwhelmingly expressed enthusiasm and satisfaction with the workshops. The number of facilitator person-hours required to operate the workshops (105 h) was similar to that required to run a single all-day larger-format conference (104.5 h). CONCLUSION: It is feasible and acceptable to incorporate expert-led skills training into the clinical workday. Alongside conferences and large-format instruction, this modality enhances the way we are able to share knowledge with our colleagues. This concept can likely be applied to other skills in various clinical settings.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia , COVID-19 , Manejo de la Vía Aérea/métodos , Competencia Clínica , Curriculum , Evaluación Educacional , Humanos , Pandemias , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
4.
Anesth Analg ; 133(5): 1331-1341, 2021 Nov 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1566542

RESUMEN

In 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic interrupted the administration of the APPLIED Examination, the final part of the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) staged examination system for initial certification. In response, the ABA developed, piloted, and implemented an Internet-based "virtual" form of the examination to allow administration of both components of the APPLIED Exam (Standardized Oral Examination and Objective Structured Clinical Examination) when it was impractical and unsafe for candidates and examiners to travel and have in-person interactions. This article describes the development of the ABA virtual APPLIED Examination, including its rationale, examination format, technology infrastructure, candidate communication, and examiner training. Although the logistics are formidable, we report a methodology for successfully introducing a large-scale, high-stakes, 2-element, remote examination that replicates previously validated assessments.


Asunto(s)
Anestesiología/educación , COVID-19/epidemiología , Certificación/métodos , Instrucción por Computador/métodos , Evaluación Educacional/métodos , Consejos de Especialidades , Anestesiología/normas , COVID-19/prevención & control , Certificación/normas , Competencia Clínica/normas , Instrucción por Computador/normas , Evaluación Educacional/normas , Humanos , Internado y Residencia/métodos , Internado y Residencia/normas , Consejos de Especialidades/normas , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
5.
Paediatr Anaesth ; 31(10): 1074-1088, 2021 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1376442

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The authors recognized a gap in existing guidelines and convened a modified Delphi process to address novel issues in pediatric difficult airway management raised by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The Pediatric Difficult Intubation Collaborative, a working group of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia, assembled an international panel to reach consensus recommendations on pediatric difficult airway management during the COVID-19 pandemic using a modified Delphi method. We reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of this process and ways care has changed as knowledge and experience have grown over the course of the pandemic. RECOMMENDATIONS: In the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Delphi panel recommends against moving away from the operating room solely for the purpose of having a negative pressure environment. The Delphi panel recommends supplying supplemental oxygen and using videolaryngoscopy during anticipated difficult airway management. Direct laryngoscopy is not recommended. If the patient meets extubation criteria, extubate in the OR, awake, at the end of the procedure. REFLECTION: These recommendations remain valuable guidance in caring for children with anticipated difficult airways and infectious respiratory pathology when reviewed in light of our growing knowledge and experience with COVID-19. The panel initially recommended minimizing involvement of additional people and trainees and minimizing techniques associated with aerosolization of viral particles. The demonstrated effectiveness of PPE and vaccination at reducing the risk of exposure and infection to clinicians managing the airway makes these recommendations less relevant for COVID-19. They would likely be important initial steps in the face of novel respiratory viral pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus process cannot and should not replace evidence-based guidelines; however, it is encouraging to see that the panel's recommendations have held up well as scientific knowledge and clinical experience have grown.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Manejo de la Vía Aérea , Niño , Consenso , Humanos , Intubación Intratraqueal , SARS-CoV-2
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA