Towards the next frontier for simulation-based training: full-hospital simulation across the entire patient pathway.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of an entire hospital simulation in imparting skills to expert healthcare providers, encompassing both retention and transfer to clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Studies demonstrating the effectiveness of simulation do not concentrate upon expert multidisciplinary teams. Moreover, their focus is confined to a single clinical setting, thereby not considering the complex interactions across multiple hospital departments. METHODS: A total of 288 participants (Attending surgeons, anesthesiologists, physicians, and nurses) completed this largest simulation study to date, set in the UK Defence Medical Services' Hospital Simulator and the conflict zone in Afghanistan. The simulator termed "Hospital Exercise" (HOSPEX) is a fully immersive live-in simulation experience that covers the entire environment of a military hospital with all departments. Participants undertook a 3-day training program within HOSPEX before deployment to war zones. Primary outcome measures were assessed with IMPAcT (the Imperial Military Personnel Assessment Tool). IMPAcT measures crisis management, trauma care, hospital environment, operational readiness, and transfer of skills to civilian practice. Reliability, skills learning, and retention in the conflict zone were assessed statistically. RESULTS: Reliability in skills assessment was excellent (Cronbach α: nontechnical skills = 0.87-0.94; environment/patient skills = 0.83-0.95). Pre/post-HOSPEX comparisons revealed significant improvements in decision making (M = 4.98, SD = 1.20 to M = 5.39, SD = 0.91; P = 0.03), situational awareness (M = 5.44, SD = 1.04 to M = 5.74, SD = 0.92; P = 0.01), trauma care (M = 5.53, SD = 1.23 to M = 5.85, SD = 1.09; P = 0.05), and knowledge of hospital environment (M = 5.19, SD = 1.17 to M = 5.42, SD = 0.97; P = 0.04). No skills decayed over time when assessed several months later in the real conflict zone. All skills transferred to civilian clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to describe the value of a full-hospital simulation across the entire patient pathway. Such macrosimulations may be the way forward for integrating the complex training needs of expert clinicians and testing organizational "fitness for purpose" of entire hospitals.

Measuring safety and efficiency in the operating room: development and validation of a metric for evaluating task execution in the operating room.

BACKGROUND: Although a number of validated tools are available for assessing nontechnical skills and teamwork in the operating room (OR), there are no tools for measuring completion of key OR tasks, which is fundamental to effective teamwork, patient safety, and OR efficiency. This study describes the development and content validation of a new tool (ie, the Metric for Evaluating Task Execution in the Operating Room) for measuring basic task completion during surgical procedures. STUDY DESIGN: The content validity of 106 OR tasks was assessed using 50 real-time observations of general surgical procedures, followed by a process of expert consensus. A panel of 15 OR experts (ie, surgeons, anesthesiologists, and OR nurses) were asked to rate all tasks observed in <70% of procedures for relevance to patient safety and OR efficiency (using scientifically accepted definitions). Tasks rated highly were retained. Those perceived less relevant were removed. A second panel of patient-safety experts refined the tool to remove duplication, ensure usability, and include novel tasks. RESULTS: Twenty-four of the original 106 tasks were observed in <70% of cases. Seven of these were rated highly by the OR experts for relevance to patient safety and efficiency and were retained in the Metric for Evaluating Task Execution in the Operating Room. Of the remaining 17, four were retained and 13 were removed by the patient-safety experts. In the final revision phase, an additional 23 tasks were removed and 10 new tasks added. The final tool consists of 80 OR tasks relating to well-established processes of care. CONCLUSIONS: The Metric for Evaluating Task Execution in the Operating Room is easy to use and can identify specific gaps in safety and/or efficiency in OR processes. Next, we should examine its links with additional measures of OR performance, for example, patient outcomes, list cancellations/delays, and nontechnical skills.