Interns' success with clinical procedures in infants after simulation training.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Simulation-based medical education (SBME) is used to teach residents. However, few studies have evaluated its clinical impact. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of an SBME session on pediatric interns' clinical procedural success. METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted at 10 academic medical centers. Interns were surveyed on infant lumbar puncture (ILP) and child intravenous line placement (CIV) knowledge and watched audiovisual expert modeling of both procedures. Participants were randomized to SBME mastery learning for ILP or CIV and for 6 succeeding months reported clinical performance for both procedures. ILP success was defined as obtaining a sample on the first attempt with <1000 red blood cells per high-power field or fluid described as clear. CIV success was defined as placement of a functioning catheter on the first try. Each group served as the control group for the procedure for which they did not receive the intervention. RESULTS: Two-hundred interns participated (104 in the ILP group and 96 in the CIV group). Together, they reported 409 procedures. ILP success rates were 34% (31 of 91) for interns who received ILP mastery learning and 34% (25 of 73) for controls (difference: 0.2% [95% confidence interval: -0.1 to 0.1]). The CIV success rate was 54% (62 of 115) for interns who received CIV mastery learning compared with 50% (58 of 115) for controls (difference: 3% [95% confidence interval: -10 to 17]). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in a single SBME mastery learning session was insufficient to affect pediatric interns' subsequent procedural success.

Qualitative evaluation of just-in-time simulation-based learning: the learners' perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Just-in-time training (JITT) is an educational strategy where training occurs in close temporal proximity to a clinical encounter. A multicenter study evaluated the impact of simulation-based JITT on interns' infant lumbar puncture (LP) success rates. Concurrent with this multicenter study, we conducted a qualitative evaluation to describe learner perceptions of this modality of skills training. METHODS: Eleven interns from a single institution participated in a face-to-face semistructured interview exploring their JITT experience. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Two investigators reviewed the transcripts, assigned codes to the data, and categorized the codes. Categories were modified by 4 emergency physicians. As a means of data triangulation, we performed focus groups at a second institution. RESULTS: Benefits of JITT included review of anatomic landmarks, procedural rehearsal, and an opportunity to ask questions. These perceived benefits improved confidence with infant LP. Deficits of the training included lack of mannequin fidelity and unrealistic context when compared with an actual LP. An unexpected category, which emerged from our analysis, was that of barriers to JITT performance. Barriers included lack of time in a busy clinical setting and various instructor factors. The focus group findings confirmed and elaborated the benefits and deficits of JITT and the barriers to JITT performance. CONCLUSIONS: Just-in-time training improved procedural confidence with infant LP, but work place busyness and instructor lack of support or unawareness were barriers to JITT performance. Optimal LP JITT would occur with improved contextual fidelity. More research is needed to determine optimal training strategies that are effective for the learner and maximize clinical outcomes for the patient.

Accuracy of plain radiographs to exclude the diagnosis of intussusception.

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively determine the test characteristics of the 3-view abdominal radiograph to decrease the likelihood of ileocolic intussusception. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study of children aged 3 months to 3 years suspected of having intussusception at a children's hospital emergency department. Clinicians obtained supine, prone, and left lateral decubitus radiographs. We determined the presence or absence of intussusception by air enema, ultrasound, operative report, or clinical follow-up. A masked pediatric radiologist reviewed all radiographs. The criteria evaluated were whether air was visualized in the ascending colon on each view and in the transverse colon on the supine view. RESULTS: Nineteen (14.8%) of 128 patients had intussusception. Using air in the ascending colon on all 3 views as the diagnostic criteria, the test characteristics of the 3-view radiograph were sensitivity, 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.1-100); specificity, 17.4% (95% CI, 11.1-26.1); negative predictive value, 100% (95% CI, 79.1-100); and likelihood ratio of a negative test, 0. When 2 or more of 3 views had air in the ascending colon, sensitivity decreased to 89.5% (95% CI, 75.7-100) and specificity improved to 45.0% (95% CI, 35.6-54.3). Air in the transverse colon had moderate sensitivity, 84.2% (95% CI, 67.8-100), but further improved specificity, 63.3% (95% CI, 54.2-72.4). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of air in the ascending colon on the 3-view abdominal radiograph can decrease the likelihood of or exclude intussusception. When clinical suspicion is low, the presence of specific criterion on a 3-view abdominal radiograph series may obviate the need for further studies.