Implementation of ReSPECT in acute hospitals: A retrospective observational study.

AIMS: To evaluate, in UK acute hospitals, the early implementation of the Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT), which embeds cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) recommendations within wider emergency treatment plans. To understand for whom and how the process was being used and the quality of form completion. METHODS: A retrospective observational study evaluating emergency care and treatment planning approaches used in acute UK hospitals (2015-2019), and in six English hospital trusts the extent of ReSPECT use, patient characteristics and completion quality in a sample 3000 patient case notes. RESULTS: The use of stand-alone Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation forms fell from 133/186 hospitals in 2015 to 64/186 in 2019 (a 38% absolute reduction). ReSPECT accounted for 52% (36/69) of changes. In the six sites, ReSPECT was used for approximately 20% of patients (range 6%-41%). They tended to be older, to have had an emergency medical admission, to have cognitive impairment and a lower predicted 10 year survival. Most (653/706 (92%)) included a 'not for attempted resuscitation' recommendation 551/706 (78%) had at least one other treatment recommendation. Capacity was not recorded on 13% (95/706) of forms; 11% (79/706) did not record patient/family involvement. CONCLUSIONS: ReSPECT use accounts for 52% of the change, observed between 2015 and 2019, from using standalone DNACPR forms to approaches embedding DNACPR decisions within in wider emergency care plans in NHS hospitals in the UK. Whilst recommendations include other emergencies most still tend to focus on recommendations relating to CPR. Completion of ReSPECT forms requires improvement. STUDY REGISTRATION: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11112933.

Why, when and how do secondary-care clinicians have emergency care and treatment planning conversations? Qualitative findings from the ReSPECT Evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: The Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) is an emergency care and treatment planning (ECTP) process, developed to offer a patient-centred approach to deciding about and recording treatment recommendations. Conversations between clinicians and patients or their representatives are central to the ReSPECT process. This study aims to understand why, when, and how ReSPECT conversations unfold in practice. METHODS: ReSPECT conversations were observed in hospitals within six acute National Health Service (NHS) trusts in England; the clinicians who conducted these conversations were interviewed. Following observation-based thematic analysis, five ReSPECT conversation types were identified: resuscitation and escalation; confirmation of decision; bad news; palliative care; and clinical decision. Interview-based thematic analysis examined the reasons and prompts for each conversation type, and the level of detail and patient engagement in these different conversations. RESULTS: Whereas resuscitation and escalation conversations concerned possible futures, palliative care and bad news conversations responded to present-tense changes. Conversations were timed to respond to organisational, clinical, and patient/relative prompts. While bad news and palliative care conversations included detailed discussions of treatment options beyond CPR, this varied in other conversation types. ReSPECT conversations varied in doctors' engagement with patient/relative preferences, with only palliative care conversations consistently including an open-ended approach. CONCLUSIONS: While ReSPECT supports holistic, person-centred, anticipatory decision-making in some situations, a gap remains between the ReSPECT's aims and their implementation in practice. Promoting an understanding and valuing of the aims of ReSPECT among clinicians, supported by appropriate training and structural support, will enhance ReSPECT conversations.

The effect of pre-course e-learning prior to advanced life support training: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of e-learning in contemporary healthcare education is quickly developing. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between the use of an e-learning simulation programme (Microsim, Laerdal, UK) prior to attending an Advanced Life Support (ALS) course and the subsequent relationship to candidate performance. METHODS: An open label, multi-centre randomised controlled study was conducted. The control group received a course manual and pre-course MCQ four weeks prior to the face to face course. The intervention group in addition received the Microsim programme on a CD. The primary outcome was performance during a simulated cardiac arrest at the end of the course. Secondary outcomes were performance during multiple choice exams, resuscitation skills assessments and feedback to Microsim programme. RESULTS: 572 participants were randomised (287 Microsim, 285 control). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome (performance during a standard cardiac arrest simulation) or secondary outcomes. User evaluations were favorable. 79% would recommend it to colleagues. 9% stated Microsim could replace the entire ALS course, 25% parts. Over 70% of participants' perceived that Microsim improved their understanding of the key learning domains of the ALS course. CONCLUSION: Distributing Microsim to healthcare providers prior to attending an ALS courses did not improve either cognitive or psychomotor skills performance during cardiac arrest simulation testing. The challenge that lies ahead is to identify the optimal way to use e-learning as part of a blended approach to learning for this type of training programme.

Validation for a scoring system of the ALS cardiac arrest simulation test (CASTest).

AIM: The cardiac arrest simulation test (CASTest) assesses resuscitation knowledge and skills during a simulated cardiac arrest. The aim of this study is to validate an alternative scoring system for measuring individual candidate performance during research involving the CASTest. METHODS: The performance of 537 participants was measured using the new scoring system. Evidence of internal structure was sought by comparing the score with global rating of performance and pass/fail decision; identification of participants with instructor potential, skill tests and MCQ scores. Relationships between CASTest score, profession and seniority were also examined. RESULTS: Global assessment of performance identified 413 passes (76.9%) and 124 fails (23.1%). CASTest score was significantly higher in those that passed than in those that failed (median 77 vs 62.5, P<0.0001). There were no differences between professions. Senior staff performed slightly better than junior staff (median 74 and 72 respectively, P=0.01). Excellent participants (identified as having instructor potential) scored significantly higher than the other participants (median 94 and 72 respectively, P<0.0001). A strong correlation was demonstrated between domains in the CASTest (rho 0.72-0.82, P<0.01). Other assessment outcomes for the ALS course correlated poorly with CASTest scores (rho 0.27-0.37, P<0.01). CONCLUSION: This new simple scoring system can be used to better characterise performance on the ALS course CASTest than the current binary pass-fail outcome.

Use of advanced life support skills.

BACKGROUND: The Advanced Life Support (ALS) Provider Course trains healthcare professionals in a standardised approach to the management of a cardiac arrest. In the setting of limited resources for healthcare training, it is important that courses are fit for purpose in addressing the needs of both the individual and healthcare system. This study investigated the use of ALS skills in clinical practice after training on an ALS course amongst members of the cardiac arrest team compared to first responders. METHODS: Questionnaires measuring skill use after an ALS course were distributed to 130 doctors and nurses. RESULTS: 91 replies were returned. Basic life support, basic airway management, manual defibrillation, rhythm recognition, drug administration, team leadership, peri- and post-arrest management and resuscitation in special circumstances were used significantly more often by cardiac arrest team members than first responders. There was no difference in skill use between medically and nursing qualified first responders or arrest team members. CONCLUSION: We believe that the ALS course is more appropriately targeted to members of a cardiac arrest team. In our opinion the recently launched Immediate Life Support course, in parallel with training in the recognition and intervention in the early stages of critical illness, are more appropriate for the occasional or first responder to a cardiac arrest.