Ultrastructural analysis of explanted CyPass microstents and correlation with clinical findings.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to obtain insight into cellular processes after CyPass microstent implantation into the supraciliary space. With this knowledge, we expected to find some reason for surgical failure. METHODS: Nine CyPass microstents of 8 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (n = 1), pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (n = 5), uveitic glaucoma (n = 1), and posttraumatic open-angle glaucoma (n = 1) were explanted due to recurrence of IOP elevation, corneal decompensation, or persistent hypotony. The explants were processed for light and transmission electron microscopy. RESULTS: Fibrotic material, consisting of collagen fibrils, microfibrils, pseudoexfoliation fibrils produced by activated fibroblasts, was detected in the stent lumen of 4/5 pseudoexfoliation glaucoma patients and also in posttraumatic open-angle glaucoma. Fibrotic material was also present on the outer surface and within fenestrations of the majority of stents. Complete absence of fibrotic reaction was noticed in 3 of 9 microstents. CONCLUSION: Although MIGS is known to be less invasive than conventional surgery, implants placed in the suprachoroidal space may be adversely affected by a fibrotic tissue reaction resulting in implant failure. Understanding mechanisms and risk factors leading to fibrotic scarring following antiglaucomatous surgery may help to develop novel strategies that improve surgical outcome.

A retrospective audit of postoperative days alive and out of hospital, including before and after implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist.

We implemented the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist at Auckland City Hospital from November 2007. We hypothesised that the checklist would reduce postoperative mortality and increase days alive and out of hospital, both measured to 90 postoperative days. We compared outcomes for cohorts who had surgery during 18-month periods before vs. after checklist implementation. We also analysed outcomes during 9 years that included these periods (July 2004-December 2013). We analysed 9475 patients in the 18-month period before the checklist and 10,589 afterwards. We analysed 57,577 patients who had surgery from 2004 to 2013. Mean number of days alive and out of hospital (95%CI) in the cohort after checklist implementation was 1.0 (0.4-1.6) days longer than in the cohort preceding implementation, p < 0.001. Ninety-day mortality was 395/9475 (4%) and 362/10,589 (3%) in the cohorts before and after checklist implementation, multivariable odds ratio (95%CI) 0.93 (0.80-1.09), p = 0.4. The cohort changes in these outcomes were indistinguishable from longer-term trends in mortality and days alive and out of hospital observed during 9 years, as determined by Bayesian changepoint analysis. Postoperative mortality to 90 days was 228/5686 (4.0%) for Maori and 2047/51,921 (3.9%) for non-Maori, multivariable odds ratio (95%CI) 0.85 (0.73-0.99), p = 0.04. Maori spent on average (95%CI) 1.1 (0.5-1.7) fewer days alive and out of hospital than non-Maori, p < 0.001. In conclusion, our patients experienced improving postoperative outcomes from 2004 to 2013, including the periods before and after implementation of the surgical checklist. Maori patients had worse outcomes than non-Maori.

Making robust assessments of specialist trainees' workplace performance.

BACKGROUND: Workplace-based assessments should provide a reliable measure of trainee performance, but have met with mixed success. We proposed that using an entrustability scale, where supervisors scored trainees on the level of supervision required for the case would improve the utility of compulsory mini-clinical evaluation exercise (CEX) assessments in a large anaesthesia training program. METHODS: We analysed mini-CEX scores from all Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists trainees submitted to an online database over a 12-month period. Supervisors' scores were adjusted for the expected supervision requirement for the case for trainees at different stages of training. We used generalisability theory to determine score reliability. RESULTS: 7808 assessments were available for analysis. Supervision requirements decreased significantly (P < 0.05) with increased duration and level of training, supporting validity. We found moderate reliability (G > 0.7) with a feasible number of assessments. Adjusting scores against the expected supervision requirement considerably improved reliability, with G > 0.8 achieved with only nine assessments. Three per cent of trainees generated average mini-CEX scores below the expected standard. CONCLUSIONS: Using an entrustment scoring system, where supervisors score trainees on the level of supervision required, mini-CEX scores demonstrated moderate reliability within a feasible number of assessments, and evidence of validity. When scores were adjusted against an expected standard, underperforming trainees could be identified, and reliability much improved. Taken together with other evidence on trainee ability, the mini-CEX is of sufficient reliability for inclusion in high stakes decisions on trainee progression towards independent specialist practice.

Evaluating the ORSIM® simulator for assessment of anaesthetists' skills in flexible bronchoscopy: aspects of validity and reliability.

BACKGROUND: Developing expertise in flexible bronchoscopy is limited by inadequate opportunities to train on difficult airways. The new ORSIM bronchoscopy simulator aims to address this by creating virtual patients with difficult airways. This study aims to provide evidence on the validity and reliability of the ORSIM for assessment of subjects on both normal and abnormal airway simulations. METHODS: Novice, trainee, and expert subjects performed seven simulations of varying difficulty and scored the perceived difficulty for each. Time to completion was measured. Three blinded raters independently scored videos of each subject's performance. We measured inter-rater agreement and the difference in raters' scores between subject groups. RESULTS: We recruited 28 study subjects, generating 196 videos for analysis. Expert subjects consistently completed the scenarios faster than novices. Overall performance scores showed significant differences between subject groups (P<0.0001). Inter-rater reliability of scores was >0.8. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide initial evidence on the validity and reliability of the ORSIM bronchoscopy simulator, supporting its potential value in training and assessment.

Deviation from accepted drug administration guidelines during anaesthesia in twenty highly realistic simulated cases.

Deviations from accepted practice guidelines and protocols are poorly understood, yet some deviations are likely to be deliberate and carry potential for patient harm. Anaesthetic teams practice in a complex work environment and anaesthetists are unusual in that they both prescribe and administer the drugs they use, allowing scope for idiosyncratic practise. We aimed to better understand the intentions underlying deviation from accepted guidelines during drug administration in simulated cases. An observer recorded events that may have increased the risk of patient harm ('Events of Interest' [EOIs]) during 20 highly realistic simulated anaesthetic cases. In semi-structured interviews, details of EOIs were confirmed with participating anaesthetic teams, and intentions and reasoning underlying the confirmed deviations were discussed. Confirmed details of EOIs were tabulated and we undertook qualitative analysis of interview transcripts. Twenty-four EOIs (69% of 35 recorded) were judged by participants to carry potential for patient harm, and 12 (34%) were judged to be deviations from accepted guidelines (including one drug administration error). Underlying reasons for deviations included a strong sense of clinical autonomy, poor clinical relevance and a lack of evidence for guidelines, ingrained habits learnt in early training, and the influence of peers. Guidelines are important in clinical practice, yet self-identified deviation from accepted guidelines was common in our results, and all but one of these events was judged to carry potential for patient harm. A better understanding of the reasons underlying deviation from accepted guidelines is essential to the design of more effective guidelines and to achieving compliance.

Teaching and learning in undergraduate anaesthesia: a quantitative and qualitative analysis of practice at the University of Auckland.

Anaesthesia encompasses a broad range of knowledge and skills of relevance to graduating doctors. For the majority of new doctors, an undergraduate clinical rotation is their only exposure to anaesthesia practice. However, the content and approach to undergraduate anaesthesia education varies between institutions. We explored our students' views and experiences, and teaching approaches and expectations of consultant anaesthetists during a clinical attachment in anaesthesia. Our mixed-method design included student and staff surveys, logbook analysis and student focus groups. Logbook analysis of all 202 students showed mean numbers of attempts for bag-mask ventilation, laryngeal mask insertion, tracheal intubation and IV cannulation were 6.8, 3.9, 3.3 and 4.5, respectively. Focus group responses (11 students, three groups) suggested a mismatch between students' expectations of performing clinical skills and the available opportunities, particularly for IV cannulation. Students often felt reluctant to ask anaesthetists to teach them, and appreciated clinician-led engagement in all aspects of learning patient management. Among the 78 anaesthetists (29.3%) responding to the survey, the five tasks most frequently identified as suitable for teaching to students all related to airway management. Our study found much unanticipated variability in student exposure, teaching practice and attitudes to teaching various skills or procedures between anaesthetists, and student opinion of their clinical attachment. The findings resulted in a review of many aspects of the attachment. It is likely that other institutions will have similar variability and we recommend they undertake similar exercises to optimise teaching and learning opportunities for undergraduate anaesthesia.

Debriefing after simulation-based non-technical skill training in healthcare: a systematic review of effective practice.

Non-technical skills training in healthcare frequently uses high-fidelity simulation followed by a facilitated discussion known as debriefing. This type of training is mandatory for anaesthesia training in Australia and New Zealand. Debriefing by a skilled facilitator is thought to be essential for new learning through feedback and reflective processes. Key elements of effective debriefing need to be clearly identified to ensure that the training is evidence-based. We undertook a systematic review of empirical studies where elements of debriefing have been systematically manipulated during non-technical skills training. Eight publications met the inclusion criteria, but seven of these were of limited generalisability. The only study that was generalisable found that debriefing by novice instructors using a script improved team leader performance in paediatric resuscitation. The remaining seven publications were limited by the small number of debriefers included in each study and these reports were thus analogous to case reports. Generally, performance improved after debriefing by a skilled facilitator. However, the debriefer provided no specific advantage over other post-experience educational interventions. Acknowledging their limitations, these studies found that performance improved after self-led debrief, no debrief (with experienced practitioners), standardised multimedia debrief or after reviewing a DVD of the participants' own eye-tracking. There was no added performance improvement when review of a video recording was added to facilitator-led debriefing. One study reported no performance improvement after debriefing. Without empirical evidence that is specific to the healthcare domain, theories of learning from education and psychology should continue to inform practices and teaching for effective debriefing.

The impact of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists' specialist examinations on trainee learning and wellbeing: a qualitative study.

Assessment is an essential component of any medical specialist training program and should motivate trainees to acquire and retain the knowledge and skills essential for specialist practice, and to develop effective approaches to learning, essential for continuous professional development. Ideally, this should be achieved without creating an unreasonable burden of assessment. In this qualitative study we sought to investigate the underlying processes involved in trainees' preparation for Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists' examinations, focusing on how the examinations helped trainees to learn the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists' curriculum, and to identify any potential areas for improvement. We also explored the effect the examinations had on trainees' lives, to identify if the examinations were a potential threat to their wellbeing. Using a phenomenological approach and purposive sampling, we conducted semi-structured interviews with post-fellowship trainees (n=20) selected from three different regions, with sampling continuing to achieve data saturation. We undertook a thematic analysis of the transcribed interview data utilising a general inductive approach. Our preliminary data suggest that, while the examinations are an important extrinsic motivator to learn and important for professional development, interviewees described many test-driven learning strategies, including rote learning and memorising past examination questions. A strong theme was the considerable impact on participants' relationships and social activities for prolonged periods. Our findings support further research in this area and, in particular, into alternative testing strategies that might increase the proportion of time spent in useful study while decreasing less useful study time.

Can I leave the theatre? A key to more reliable workplace-based assessment.

BACKGROUND: The value of workplace-based assessments such as the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX), and clinicians' confidence and engagement in the process, has been constrained by low reliability and limited capacity to identify underperforming trainees. We proposed that changing the way supervisors make judgements about trainees would improve score reliability and identification of underperformers. Anaesthetists regularly make decisions about the level of trainee independence with a case, based on how closely they need to supervise them. We therefore used this as the basis for a new scoring system. METHODS: We analysed 338 mini-CEXs where supervisors scored trainees using the conventional system, and also scored trainee independence, based on the need for direct, or more distant, supervision. As supervisory requirements depend on case difficulty, we then compared the actual trainee independence score and the expected trainee independence score obtained externally. RESULTS: Compared with the conventional scoring system used in previous studies, reliability was very substantially improved using a system based on a trainee's level of independence with a case. Reliability improved further when this score was corrected for case difficulty. Furthermore, the new scoring system overcame the previously identified problem of assessor leniency and identified a number of trainees performing below expectations. CONCLUSIONS: Supervisors' judgements on trainee independence with a case, based on the need for direct or more distant supervision, can generate reliable scores of trainee ability without the need for an onerous number of assessments, identify trainees performing below expectations, and track trainee progress towards independent specialist practice.

Improving team information sharing with a structured call-out in anaesthetic emergencies: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sharing information with the team is critical in developing a shared mental model in an emergency, and fundamental to effective teamwork. We developed a structured call-out tool, encapsulated in the acronym 'SNAPPI': Stop; Notify; Assessment; Plan; Priorities; Invite ideas. We explored whether a video-based intervention could improve structured call-outs during simulated crises and if this would improve information sharing and medical management. METHODS: In a simulation-based randomized, blinded study, we evaluated the effect of the video-intervention teaching SNAPPI on scores for SNAPPI, information sharing, and medical management using baseline and follow-up crisis simulations. We assessed information sharing using a probe technique where nurses and technicians received unique, clinically relevant information probes before the simulation. Shared knowledge of probes was measured in a written, post-simulation test. We also scored sharing of diagnostic options with the team and medical management. RESULTS: Anaesthetists' scores for SNAPPI were significantly improved, as was the number of diagnostic options they shared. We found a non-significant trend to improve information-probe sharing and medical management in the intervention group, and across all simulations, a significant correlation between SNAPPI and information-probe sharing. Of note, only 27% of the clinically relevant information about the patient provided to the nurse and technician in the pre-simulation information probes was subsequently learnt by the anaesthetist. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a structured communication tool, SNAPPI, to improve information sharing between anaesthetists and their team, taught it using a video-based intervention, and provide initial evidence to support its value for improving communication in a crisis.

Approaches to learning for the ANZCA Final Examination and validation of the revised Study Process Questionnaire in specialist medical training.

When evaluating assessments, the impact on learning is often overlooked. Approaches to learning can be deep, surface and strategic. To provide insights into exam quality, we investigated the learning approaches taken by trainees preparing for the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) Final Exam. The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) was modified and validated for this context and was administered to ANZCA advanced trainees. Additional questions were asked about perceived value for anaesthetic practice, study time and approaches to learning for each exam component. Overall, 236 of 690 trainees responded (34%). Responses indicated both deep and surface approaches to learning with a clear preponderance of deep approaches. The anaesthetic viva was valued most highly and the multiple choice question component the least. Despite this, respondents spent the most time studying for the multiple choice questions. The traditionally low short answer questions pass rate could not be explained by limited study time, perceived lack of value or study approaches. Written responses suggested that preparation for multiple choice questions was characterised by a surface approach, with rote memorisation of past questions. Minimal reference was made to the ANZCA syllabus as a guide for learning. These findings indicate that, although trainees found the exam generally relevant to practice and adopted predominantly deep learning approaches, there was considerable variation between the four components. These results provide data with which to review the existing ANZCA Final Exam and comparative data for future studies of the revisions to the ANZCA curriculum and exam process.

Education in airway management.

In airway management, poor judgment, education and training are leading causes of patient morbidity and mortality. The traditional model of medical education, which relies on experiential learning in the clinical environment, is inconsistent and often inadequate. Curriculum change is underway in many medical organisations in an effort to correct these problems, and airway management is likely to be explicitly addressed as a clinical fundamental within any new anaesthetic curriculum. Competency-based medical education with regular assessment of clinical ability is likely to be introduced for all anaesthetists engaged in airway management. Essential clinical competencies need to be defined and improvements in training techniques can be expected based on medical education research. Practitioners need to understand their equipment and diversify their airway skills to cope with a variety of clinical presentations. Expertise stems from deliberate practice and a desire constantly to improve performance with a career-long commitment to education.