Evaluating an inquiry-based learning program.

Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is a promising educational framework that is understudied in graduate medical education. To determine participant satisfaction and engagement with phases of an IBL postgraduate education program, a mixed-methods study collected data via survey statements and open-ended responses. The authors included participants attending an intensive care medicine (ICM) IBL program from May to November 2020. Quantitative outcomes included participants' satisfaction with the IBL format and impact of engagement with IBL on the learning experience. Qualitative outcomes explored determinants of engagement with IBL phases and the impact on the learning experience. Of 378 attendees, 167 submitted survey responses (44.2%). There was strong agreement relating to overall satisfaction (93.4%). Responses indicated engagement with "orientation" (94.6%), "conceptualization" (97.3%), "discussion" (91.1%), and "conclusion" (91.0%) but limited engagement with the "investigation" phase (48.1%). Greater engagement with IBL phases had positive impacts, with repeat attenders having clearer learning objectives (79.1% vs. 56.6%, P < 0.05) and enhanced learning through collaborative discussion (65.9% vs. 48.7%, P < 0.05). Qualitative analysis showed that ICM learners value active learning principles, clear objectives, and a safe environment to expand their "knowledge base." Sessions facilitated "clinically relevant learning," with application of theoretical knowledge. Learners transformed and "reframed their understanding," using the input of others' experiences. ICM learners were highly satisfied with the IBL format and reported valuable learning. Participants engaged strongly with all IBL phases except the investigation phase during the sessions. IBL facilitated learners' active construction of meaning, facilitating a constructivist approach to learning.NEW & NOTEWORTHY An inquiry-based learning (IBL) program was launched as part of a novel binational intensive care medicine education program. Postgraduate intensive care medicine practitioners participated in this education intervention, where facilitated group discussions explored core intensive care medicine concepts. Survey responses indicated overall satisfaction, engagement with the IBL format, and a constructivist approach to learning. This study provided new insights into the benefits and challenges of an IBL program in the context of practicing clinicians.

Impact of COVID-19 on an Australian intensive care unit: lessons learned from South Australia.

The scale of the COVID-19 pandemic represents unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems. We describe a cohort of 18 critically ill COVID-19 patients - to our knowledge the highest number, in a single intensive care unit in Australia. We discuss the complex challenges and dynamic solutions that concern an intensive care unit pandemic response. Acting as the State's COVID-19 referral hospital, we provide local insights to consider alongside national guidelines.

Laboratory alerts to guide early intensive care team review in surgical patients: A feasibility, safety, and efficacy pilot randomized controlled trial.

AIM: Common blood tests can help identify patients at risk of death, unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or rapid response team (RRT) call. We aimed to test whether early ICU-team review triggered by such laboratory tests (lab alert) is feasible, safe, and can alter physiological variables, clinical management, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: In prospective pilot randomized controlled trial in surgical wards of a tertiary hospital, we studied patients admitted for >24 h. We applied a previously validated risk assessment tool to each set of common laboratory tests to identify patients at risk and generate a "lab-alert". We randomly allocated such lab-alert patients to receive early ICU-team review (intervention) or usual care (control). RESULTS: We studied 205 patients (males 54.1%; average age 79 years; 103 randomized to intervention and 102 to usual care). Intervention patients were more likely to trigger RRT activation during their first lab-alert (10.7 vs. 2.0%; P < 0.001) but less likely to receive an allied health referral (18.0% vs. 24.5%; p = 0.007). They were less likely to trigger RRT activation in the 24-h before subsequent alerts (18.4 vs. 22.4%; p = 0.008) and less likely to generate further alerts (204 vs. 320; p < 0.001), but more likely to receive a not for resuscitation or endotracheal intubation status in the 24-h before subsequent alerts (26.6 vs. 17.3%; p = 0.05). Mortality at 24 h was 1.9% for the intervention group vs. 2.9% in the control group (p = 0.63). Finally, overall mortality was 19.4% for intervention patients vs. 23.5% for control patients (p = 0.50). CONCLUSION: Among surgical patients, lab alerts identify patients with a high mortality. Lab alert-triggered interventions are associated with more first alert-associated RRT activations; more changes in resuscitation status toward a more conservative approach; fewer subsequent alert-associated RRT activations; fewer subsequent alerts, and decreased allied health interventions (ANZCTRN12615000146594).