The Equivalence of Video Self-review Versus Debriefing After Simulation: Can Faculty Resources Be Reallocated?

INTRODUCTION: Traditional simulation debriefing is both time- and resource-intensive. Shifting the degree of primary learning responsibility from the faculty to the learner through self-guided learning has received greater attention as a means of reducing this resource intensity. The aim of the study was to determine if video-assisted self-debriefing, as a form of self-guided learning, would have equivalent learning outcomes compared to standard debriefing. METHODS: This randomized cohort study consisting of 49 PGY-1 to -3 emergency medicine residents compared performance after video self-assessment utilizing an observer checklist versus standard debriefing for simulated emergency department procedural sedation (EDPS). The primary outcome measure was performance on the second EDPS scenario. RESULTS: Independent-samples t-test found that both control (standard debrief) and intervention (video self-assessment) groups demonstrated significantly increased scores on Scenario 2 (standard-t(40) = 2.20, p < 0.05; video-t(45) = 3.88, p < 0.05). There was a large and significant positive correlation between faculty and resident self-evaluation (r = 0.70, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between faculty and residents self-assessment mean scores (t(24) = 1.90, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Residents receiving feedback on their performance via video-assisted self-debriefing improved their performance in simulated EDPS to the same degree as with standard faculty debriefing. Video-assisted self-debriefing is a promising avenue for leveraging the benefits of simulation-based training with reduced resource requirements.

Impact of an Electronic App on Resident Responses to Simulated In-Flight Medical Emergencies: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers are often called to respond to in-flight medical emergencies, but lack familiarity with expected supplies, interventions, and ground medical control support. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether a mobile phone app (airRx) improves responses to simulated in-flight medical emergencies. METHODS: This was a randomized study of volunteer, nonemergency resident physician participants who managed simulated in-flight medical emergencies with or without the app. Simulations took place in a mock-up cabin in the simulation center. Standardized participants played the patient, family member, and flight attendant roles. Live, nonblinded rating was used with occasional video review for data clarification. Participants participated in two simulated in-flight medical emergencies (shortness of breath and syncope) and were evaluated with checklists and global rating scales (GRS). Checklist item success rates, key critical action times, GRS, and pre-post simulation confidence in managing in-flight medical emergencies were compared. RESULTS: There were 29 participants in each arm (app vs control; N=58) of the study. Mean percentages of completed checklist items for the app versus control groups were mean 56.1 (SD 10.3) versus mean 49.4 (SD 7.4) for shortness of breath (P=.001) and mean 58 (SD 8.1) versus mean 49.8 (SD 7.0) for syncope (P<.001). The GRS improved with the app for the syncope case (mean 3.14, SD 0.89 versus control mean 2.6, SD 0.97; P=.003), but not the shortness of breath case (mean 2.90, SD 0.97 versus control mean 2.81, SD 0.80; P=.43). For timed checklist items, the app group contacted ground support faster for both cases, but the control group was faster to complete vitals and basic exam. Both groups indicated higher confidence in their postsimulation surveys, but the app group demonstrated a greater increase in this measure. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the airRx app prompted some actions, but delayed others. Simulated performance and feedback suggest the app is a useful adjunct for managing in-flight medical emergencies.

A Simple Low-Cost Method to Integrate Telehealth Interprofessional Team Members During In Situ Simulation.

INTRODUCTION: With the growth of telehealth, simulation personnel will be called upon to support training that integrates these new technologies and processes. We sought to integrate remote telehealth electronic intensive care unit (eICU) personnel into in situ simulations with rural emergency department (ED) care teams. We describe how we overcame technical challenges of creating shared awareness of the patient's condition and the care team's progress among those executing the simulation, the care team, and the eICU. METHODS: The objective of the simulations was to introduce telehealth technology and new processes of engaging the eICU via telehealth during sepsis care in 2 rural EDs. Scenario development included experts in sepsis, telehealth, and emergency medicine. We describe the operational systems challenges, alternatives considered, and solutions used. Participants completed surveys on self-confidence presimulation/postsimulation in using telehealth and in managing patients with sepsis (1-10 Likert scale, with 10 "completely confident"). Pre-post responses were compared by two-tailed paired t test. RESULTS: We successfully engaged the staff of two EDs: 42 nurses, 9 physicians or advanced practice providers, and 9 technicians (N = 60). We used a shared in situ simulation clinical actions observational checklist, created within an off-the-shelf survey software program, completed during the simulations by an on-site observer, and shared with the eICU team via teleconferencing software, to message and cue eICU nurse engagement. The eICU nurse also participated in debriefing via the telehealth video system with successful simulation engagement. These solutions avoided interfering with real ED or eICU operations. The postsimulation mean ± SD ratings of confidence using telehealth increased from 5.3 ± 2.9 to 8.9 ± 1.1 (Δ3.5, P < 0.05) and in managing patients with sepsis increased from 7.1 ± 2.5 to 8.9 ± 1.1 (Δ1.8, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We created shared awareness between remote eICU personnel and in situ simulations in rural EDs via a low-cost method using survey software combined with teleconferencing methods.

Advance Care Planning in an Accountable Care Organization Is Associated with Increased Advanced Directive Documentation and Decreased Costs.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) documents patient wishes and increases awareness of palliative care options. OBJECTIVE: To study the association of outpatient ACP with advanced directive documentation, utilization, and costs of care. DESIGN: This was a case-control study of cases with ACP who died matched 1:1 with controls. We used 12 months of data pre-ACP/prematch and predeath. We compared rates of documentation with logit model regression and conducted a difference-in-difference analysis using generalized linear models for utilization and costs. SETTING/SUBJECTS: Medicare beneficiaries attributed to a large rural-suburban-small metro multisite accountable care organization from January 2013 to April 2016, with cross reference to ACP facilitator logs to find cases. MEASUREMENTS: The presence of advance directive forms was verified by chart review. Cost analysis included all utilization and costs billed to Medicare. RESULTS: We matched 325 cases and 325 controls (51.1% female and 48.9% male, mean age 81). 320/325 (98.5%) ACP versus 243/325 (74.8%) of controls had a Healthcare Power of Attorney (odds ratio [OR] 21.6, 95% CI 8.6-54.1) and 172/325(52.9%) ACP versus 145/325 (44.6%) controls had Practitioner Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02-1.90) post-ACP/postmatch. Adjusted results showed ACP cases had fewer inpatient admissions (-0.37 admissions, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.08), and inpatient days (-3.66 days, 95% CI -6.23 to -1.09), with no differences in hospice, hospice days, skilled nursing facility use, home health use, 30-day readmissions, or emergency department visits. Adjusted costs were $9,500 lower in the ACP group (95% CI -$16,207 to -$2,793). CONCLUSIONS: ACP increases documentation and was associated with a reduction in overall costs driven primarily by a reduction in inpatient utilization. Our data set was limited by small numbers of minorities and cancer patients.

Deliberate Practice with Standardized Patient Actors and the Development of Formative Feedback for Advance Care Planning Facilitators.

OBJECTIVE: Multimodal curricular assessment after adding standardized patient (SP) actor-based simulation to an advance care planning (ACP) facilitator training course and development of a formative feedback tool. BACKGROUND: ACP represents a highly valued service requiring more and better trained facilitators. METHODS: Participants were primarily nurses and social workers in a large multisite health system. The course included a precourse video demonstration of ACP, traditional lectures, and four 30-minute simulations with SPs. Knowledge was tested with a multiple choice question (MCQ) test. In addition to standard postcourse/postsimulation evaluations, learners were surveyed pre/post/30-90 days delayed for self-perceived confidence. A linear mixed-effects model was used to analyze changes over time. Trained faculty rated performance in simulations with an observational mini-clinical examination (mini-CEX)-type rating form with a checklist, global competency, and global communication rating. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) was calculated on randomly selected paired ratings. RESULTS: Sixty-seven individuals consented to participate. MCQ scores improved from 83% ± 10% to 92% ± 8% (p < 0.001). Paired learner surveys of self-confidence across six domains were available for 65 pre, 65 post, and 40 delayed with a mean positive change on a 0 to 10 point scale from pre-post (2.32 ± 1.65; p < 0.001) and predelayed (2.34 ± 1.96; p < 0.001) time frames. For the faculty observation ratings of simulation performance, the average raw agreement for critical actions was 82% and IRR was 0.71. CONCLUSIONS: Learner feedback and self-assessment suggest that actor-based simulation contributed to improved confidence in conducting ACP. The mini-CEX observation form is adequate for formative feedback, with further testing needed to make judgments of competence.