In Situ Simulation as a Quality Improvement Tool to Identify and Mitigate Latent Safety Threats for Emergency Department SARS-CoV-2 Airway Management: A Multi-institutional Initiative

Background : In situ simulation has emerged as a powerful quality improvement (QI) tool in the identification of latent safety threats (LSTs). Following the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 at an urban epicenter of the disease, a multi-institutional collaborative was formed to integrate an in-situ simulation protocol across five emergency departments (EDs) for systems improvement of acute airway management. Methods : A prospective, multi-institutional QI initiative using two Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles was implemented across five EDs. Each institution conducted simulations involving mannequins in acute respiratory failure requiring definitive airways. Simulations and systems-based debriefs were standardized. LSTs were collected in an online database, focused on: (1) equipment availability, (2) infection control, and (3) communication. Results : From June 2020 through May 2021, 58 of 70 (82.9%) planned simulations were completed across five sites with 328 unique individual participants. Overall LSTs per simulation (7.00–4.69, p < 0.001) and equipment LSTs (3.00–1.46, p < 0.001) decreased from cycle 1 to cycle 2. Changes in mean LSTs for infection control and communication categories varied among sites. There was no correlation between total LSTs or any of the subcategories and team size. Number of beds occupied was significantly negatively correlated with total and infection control LSTs. Conclusion : This study was unique in simultaneously running a structured in situ protocol across numerous diverse institutions during a global pandemic. This initiative found similar categories of threats across sites, and the protocol developed empowered participants to implement changes to mitigate identified threats.

In Situ Simulation as a Quality Improvement Tool to Identify and Mitigate Latent Safety Threats for Emergency Department SARS-CoV-2 Airway Management: A Multi-Institutional Initiative.

BACKGROUND: In situ simulation has emerged as a powerful quality improvement (QI) tool in the identification of latent safety threats (LSTs). Following the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 at an urban epicenter of the disease, a multi-institutional collaborative was formed to integrate an in situ simulation protocol across five emergency departments (EDs) for systems improvement of acute airway management. METHODS: A prospective, multi-institutional QI initiative using two Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles was implemented across five EDs. Each institution conducted simulations involving mannequins in acute respiratory failure requiring definitive airways. Simulations and systems-based debriefs were standardized. LSTs were collected in an online database, focused on (1) equipment availability, (2) infection control, and (3) communication. RESULTS: From June 2020 through May 2021, 58 of 70 (82.9%) planned simulations were completed across five sites with 328 unique individual participants. Overall LSTs per simulation (7.00-4.69, p < 0.001) and equipment LSTs (3.00-1.46, p < 0.001) decreased from cycle 1 to cycle 2. Changes in mean LSTs for infection control and communication categories varied among sites. There was no correlation between total LSTs or any of the categories and team size. Number of beds occupied was significantly negatively correlated with total and infection control LSTs. CONCLUSION: This study was unique in simultaneously running a structured in situ protocol across numerous diverse institutions during a global pandemic. This initiative found similar categories of threats across sites, and the protocol developed empowered participants to implement changes to mitigate identified threats.

In Situ Simulation as a Tool to Longitudinally Identify and Track Latent Safety Threats in a Structured Quality Improvement Initiative for SARS-CoV-2 Airway Management: A Single-Center Study.

BACKGROUND: In situ simulation has emerged as a powerful tool for identifying latent safety threats (LSTs). After the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, an urban community emergency department (ED) identified opportunities for improvement surrounding acute airway management and particularly focused on infection control precautions, equipment availability, and interprofessional communication during acute resuscitation. Using the Model for Improvement, a hybrid in situ/quality improvement initiative was implemented using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles to enhance systems for intubating patients with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Three PDSA cycles consisting of 10 simulations each were conducted from June 2020 through February 2021. Latent safety threats (LST) were identified through an in situ simulation scenario involving a patient with SARS-CoV-2 in acute respiratory failure. LSTs were collected through structured debriefs focused on (1) infection control, (2) equipment availability, and (3) communication. The SAFER-Matrix was used to score LSTs according to frequency and likelihood of harm by members of the ED QI team (SAFER score). The research team worked with the same QI leaders to implement action plans based on scored threats using cause-and-effect and driver diagrams. The Donabedian model was used to conceptually evaluate the quality of interventions upon conclusion of the third PDSA cycle. RESULTS: The median SAFER score decreased from 10.94 in PDSA cycle 1 to 6.77 in PDSA cycle 2 to 4.71 in PDSA cycle 3. Across all identified LSTs, the SAFER score decreased by 3.114 for every additional PDSA cycle (P = 0.0167). When evaluating for threats identified as being primarily structure based, there was a decrease in SAFER score of 1.28 per every additional PDSA cycle (P = 0.001). There was a decrease in total count of LST of 0.20 per additional simulation run (P = 0.02) after controlling for shift type, census, perceived workload, team size, and prior attendance in simulations across all PDSA cycles. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a blueprint for the utilization of in situ simulation through multiple waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic to identify LSTs and use the SAFER score as a surrogate marker to monitor the impact of interventions for a safer environment for both medical staff and patients.

Amplifying patient voices amid pandemic: Perspectives on tracheostomy care, communication, and connection.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate perspectives of patients, family members, caregivers (PFC), and healthcare professionals (HCP) on tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The cross-sectional survey investigating barriers and facilitators to tracheostomy care was collaboratively developed by patients, family members, nurses, speech-language pathologists, respiratory care practitioners, physicians, and surgeons. The survey was distributed to the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative's learning community, and responses were analyzed. RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 191) from 17 countries included individuals with a tracheostomy (85 [45 %]), families/caregivers (43 [22 %]), and diverse HCP (63 [33.0 %]). Overall, 94 % of respondents reported concern that patients with tracheostomy were at increased risk of critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19; 93 % reported fear or anxiety. With respect to prioritization of care, 38 % of PFC versus 16 % of HCP reported concern that patients with tracheostomies might not be valued or prioritized (p = 0.002). Respondents also differed in fear of contracting COVID-19 (69 % PFC vs. 49 % HCP group, p = 0.009); concern for hospitalization (55.5 % PFC vs. 27 % HCP, p < 0.001); access to medical personnel (34 % PFC vs. 14 % HCP, p = 0.005); and concern about canceled appointments (62 % PFC vs. 41 % HCP, p = 0.01). Respondents from both groups reported severe stress and fatigue, sleep deprivation, lack of breaks, and lack of support (70 % PFC vs. 65 % HCP, p = 0.54). Virtual telecare seldom met perceived needs. CONCLUSION: PFC with a tracheostomy perceived most risks more acutely than HCP in this global sample. Broad stakeholder engagement is necessary to achieve creative, patient-driven solutions to maintain connection, communication, and access for patients with a tracheostomy.

Safety Considerations for In Situ Simulation in Closed SARS-CoV-2 Units.

SUMMARY STATEMENT: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic placed a tremendous strain on the healthcare system, which led to the deployment of new personnel into acute care settings, early graduation of medical students, and development of new treatment spaces. Education teams at the Montefiore Health System and New York Health and Hospitals/Jacobi Medical Center found simulation, both laboratory-based and in situ, critical to the training of medical staff and investigation of latent safety threats. Through our experience, we encountered unique infection control concerns based on in situ sessions, which prompted us to redesign our programs for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Using this experience, we outline our rationale for the use of in situ simulation for newly developed SARS-CoV-2 spaces along with recommendations on safety checks to consider before starting.