Predicting Delayed Shock in Multisystem Inflammatory Disease in Children: A Multicenter Analysis From the New York City Tri-State Region.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with multisystem inflammatory disease in children (MIS-C) are at risk of developing shock. Our objectives were to determine independent predictors associated with development of delayed shock (≥3 hours from emergency department [ED] arrival) in patients with MIS-C and to derive a model predicting those at low risk for delayed shock. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of 22 pediatric EDs in the New York City tri-state area. We included patients meeting World Health Organization criteria for MIS-C and presented April 1 to June 30, 2020. Our main outcomes were to determine the association between clinical and laboratory factors to the development of delayed shock and to derive a laboratory-based prediction model based on identified independent predictors. RESULTS: Of 248 children with MIS-C, 87 (35%) had shock and 58 (66%) had delayed shock. A C-reactive protein (CRP) level greater than 20 mg/dL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-12.1), lymphocyte percent less than 11% (aOR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.7-8.6), and platelet count less than 220,000/uL (aOR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.8-9.8) were independently associated with delayed shock. A prediction model including a CRP level less than 6 mg/dL, lymphocyte percent more than 20%, and platelet count more than 260,000/uL, categorized patients with MIS-C at low risk of developing delayed shock (sensitivity 93% [95% CI, 66-100], specificity 38% [95% CI, 22-55]). CONCLUSIONS: Serum CRP, lymphocyte percent, and platelet count differentiated children at higher and lower risk for developing delayed shock. Use of these data can stratify the risk of progression to shock in patients with MIS-C, providing situational awareness and helping guide their level of care.

Simulation-based emergency medicine education in the era of physical distancing.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant challenges to traditional simulation education. Because simulation is considered best practice for competency-based education, emergency medicine (EM) residencies adapted and innovated to accommodate to the new pandemic normal. Our objectives were to identify the impact of the pandemic on EM residency simulation training, to identify unique simulation adaptations and innovations implemented during the pandemic, and to analyze successes and failures through existing educational frameworks to offer guidance on the use of simulation in the COVID-19 era. Methods: The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM)'s Simulation Academy formed the SimCOVID task force to examine the impact of COVID-19 on simulation didactics. A mixed-methods approach was employed. A literature search was conducted on the subject and used to develop an exploratory survey that was distributed on the Simulation Academy Listserv. The results were subjected to thematic analysis and examined through existing educational frameworks to better understand successes and failures and then used to generate suggestions on the use of simulation in the COVID-19 era. Results: Thirty programs responded to the survey. Strategies reported included adaptations to virtual teleconferencing and small-group in situ training with a focus on procedural training and COVID-19 preparedness. Successful continuation or relaunching of simulation programs was predicated on several factors including willingness for curricular pivots through rapid iterative prototyping, embracing teleconferencing software, technical know-how, and organizational and human capacity. In specific instances the use of in situ simulation for COVID-19 preparedness established the view of simulation as a "value add" to the organization. Conclusions: Whereas simulation educator's responses to the COVID-19 pandemic can be better appreciated through the lens of iterative curricular prototyping, their successes and failures depended on existing expertise in technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge. That knowledge needed to exist and synergize within a system that had the human and organizational capacity to prioritize and invest in strategies to respond to the rapidly evolving crisis in a proactive manner. Going forward, administrators and educators will need to advocate for continued investment in human and organizational capacity to support simulation-based efforts for the evolving clinical and educational landscape.

Implementing Automated Prone Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome via Simulation-Based Training.

BACKGROUND: Prone position ventilation (PPV) is recommended for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, but it remains underused. Interprofessional simulation-based training for PPV has not been described. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of a novel interprofessional simulation-based training program on providers' perception of and comfort with PPV and the program's ability to help identify unrecognized safety issues ("latent safety threats") before implementation. METHODS: A prospective observational quality improvement study was done in the medical intensive care unit of an academic medical center. Registered nurses, physicians, and respiratory therapists were trained via a didactic session, simulations, and structured debriefings during which latent safety threats were identified. Participants completed anonymous surveys before and after training. RESULTS: A total of 73 providers (37 nurses, 18 physicians, 18 respiratory therapists) underwent training and completed surveys. Before training, only 39% of nurses agreed that PPV would be beneficial to patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, compared with 96% of physicians and 70% of respiratory therapists (P < .001). Less than half of both nurses and physicians felt comfortable taking care of prone patients. After training, perceived benefit increased among all providers. Comfort taking care of proned patients and managing cardiac arrest increased significantly among nurses and physicians. Twenty novel latent safety threats were identified. CONCLUSION: Interprofessional simulation-based training may improve providers' perception of and comfort with PPV and can help identify latent safety threats before implementation.

Applying Educational Theory and Best Practices to Solve Common Challenges of Simulation-based Procedural Training in Emergency Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Procedural competency is an essential prerequisite for the independent practice of emergency medicine. Multiple studies demonstrate that simulation-based procedural training (SBPT) is an effective method for acquiring and maintaining procedural competency and preferred over traditional paradigms ("see one, do one, teach one"). Although newer paradigms informing SBPT have emerged, educators often face circumstances that challenge and undermine their implementation. The goal of this paper is to identify and report on best practices and theory-supported solutions to some of these challenges as derived using a process of expert consensus building and reviews of the existing literature on SBPT. METHODS: The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Simulation Academy SBPT Workgroup convened approximately 8 months prior to the 2019 SAEM Annual Meeting to perform a review of the literature and participate in a consensus-building process to identify solutions (in the form of best practices and educational theory) to these challenges faced by educators engaging in SBPT. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS: Thirteen distinct educational challenges to SBPT emerged from the expert group's primary literature reviews and consensus-building processes. Three domains emerged upon further analysis of the 13 challenges: learner, educator, and curriculum. Six challenges within the "learner" domain were selected for comprehensive discussion in this paper, as they were deemed representative of the most common and most significant threats to ideal SBPT. Each of the six challenges aligns with one of the following themes: 1) maximizing active learning, 2) maintaining learner engagement, 3) embracing learner diversity, 4) optimizing cognitive load, 5) promoting mindfulness and reflection, and 6) emphasizing deliberate practice for mastery learning. Over 20 "special treatments" for mitigating the impact of the 13 challenges were derived from the secondary literature search and consensus-building process prior to and during the preconference workshop; 11 of these that best address the six learner-centered challenges are explored, including implications for educators involved in SBPT. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATORS: We propose multiple consensus-generated solutions (in the form of best practices and applied educational theory) that we believe are suitable and well aligned to overcome commonly encountered learner-centered challenges and threats to optimal SBPT.

Simulation-based Remediation in Emergency Medicine Residency Training: A Consensus Study.

INTRODUCTION: Resident remediation is a pressing topic in emergency medicine (EM) training programs. Simulation has become a prominent educational tool in EM training and been recommended for identification of learning gaps and resident remediation. Despite the ubiquitous need for formalized remediation, there is a dearth of literature regarding best practices for simulation-based remediation (SBR). METHODS: We conducted a literature search on SBR practices using the terms "simulation," "remediation," and "simulation based remediation." We identified relevant themes and used them to develop an open-ended questionnaire that was distributed to EM programs with experience in SBR. Thematic analysis was performed on all subsequent responses and used to develop survey instruments, which were then used in a modified two-round Delphi panel to derive a set of consensus statements on the use of SBR from an aggregate of 41 experts in simulation and remediation in EM. RESULTS: Faculty representing 30 programs across North America composed the consensus group with 66% of participants identifying themselves as simulation faculty, 32% as program directors, and 2% as core faculty. The results from our study highlight a strong agreement across many areas of SBR in EM training. SBR is appropriate for a range of deficits, including procedural, medical knowledge application, clinical reasoning/decision-making, communication, teamwork, and crisis resource management. Simulation can be used both diagnostically and therapeutically in remediation, although SBR should be part of a larger remediation plan constructed by the residency leadership team or a faculty expert in remediation, and not the only component. Although summative assessment can have a role in SBR, it needs to be very clearly delineated and transparent to everyone involved. CONCLUSION: Simulation may be used for remediation purposes for certain specific kinds of competencies as long as it is carried out in a transparent manner to all those involved.

Simulation for Assessment of Milestones in Emergency Medicine Residents.

OBJECTIVES: All residency programs in the United States are required to report their residents' progress on the milestones to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) biannually. Since the development and institution of this competency-based assessment framework, residency programs have been attempting to ascertain the best ways to assess resident performance on these metrics. Simulation was recommended by the ACGME as one method of assessment for many of the milestone subcompetencies. We developed three simulation scenarios with scenario-specific milestone-based assessment tools. We aimed to gather validity evidence for this tool. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study to investigate the validity evidence for three mannequin-based simulation scenarios for assessing individual residents on emergency medicine (EM) milestones. The subcompetencies (i.e., patient care [PC]1, PC2, PC3) included were identified via a modified Delphi technique using a group of experienced EM simulationists. The scenario-specific checklist (CL) items were designed based on the individual milestone items within each EM subcompetency chosen for assessment and reviewed by experienced EM simulationists. Two independent live raters who were EM faculty at the respective study sites scored each scenario following brief rater training. The inter-rater reliability (IRR) of the assessment tool was determined by measuring intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the sum of the CL items as well as the global rating scales (GRSs) for each scenario. Comparing GRS and CL scores between various postgraduate year (PGY) levels was performed with analysis of variance. RESULTS: Eight subcompetencies were chosen to assess with three simulation cases, using 118 subjects. Evidence of test content, internal structure, response process, and relations with other variables were found. The ICCs for the sum of the CL items and the GRSs were >0.8 for all cases, with one exception (clinical management GRS = 0.74 in sepsis case). The sum of CL items and GRSs (p < 0.05) discriminated between PGY levels on all cases. However, when the specific CL items were mapped back to milestones in various proficiency levels, the milestones in the higher proficiency levels (level 3 [L3] and 4 [L4]) did not often discriminate between various PGY levels. L3 milestone items discriminated between PGY levels on five of 12 occasions they were assessed, and L4 items discriminated only two of 12 times they were assessed. CONCLUSION: Three simulation cases with scenario-specific assessment tools allowed evaluation of EM residents on proficiency L1 to L4 within eight of the EM milestone subcompetencies. Evidence of test content, internal structure, response process, and relations with other variables were found. Good to excellent IRR and the ability to discriminate between various PGY levels was found for both the sum of CL items and the GRSs. However, there was a lack of a positive relationship between advancing PGY level and the completion of higher-level milestone items (L3 and L4).

Communicating Value in Simulation: Cost-Benefit Analysis and Return on Investment.

Value-based health care requires a balancing of medical outcomes with economic value. Administrators need to understand both the clinical and the economic effects of potentially expensive simulation programs to rationalize the costs. Given the often-disparate priorities of clinical educators relative to health care administrators, justifying the value of simulation requires the use of economic analyses few physicians have been trained to conduct. Clinical educators need to be able to present thorough economic analyses demonstrating returns on investment and cost-effectiveness to effectively communicate with administrators. At the 2017 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference "Catalyzing System Change through Health Care Simulation: Systems, Competency, and Outcomes," our breakout session critically evaluated the cost-benefit and return on investment of simulation. In this paper we provide an overview of some of the economic tools that a clinician may use to present the value of simulation training to financial officers and other administrators in the economic terms they understand. We also define three themes as a call to action for research related to cost-benefit analysis in simulation as well as four specific research questions that will help guide educators and hospital leadership to make decisions on the value of simulation for their system or program.

Communicating Value in Simulation: Cost Benefit Analysis and Return on Investment.

Value-based health care requires a balancing of medical outcomes with economic value. Administrators need to understand both the clinical and economic effects of potentially expensive simulation programs to rationalize the costs. Given the often-disparate priorities of clinical educators relative to health care administrators, justifying the value of simulation requires the use of economic analyses few physicians have been trained to conduct. Clinical educators need to be able to present thorough economic analyses demonstrating returns on investment and cost effectiveness to effectively communicate with administrators. At the 2017 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference "Catalyzing System Change through Health Care Simulation: Systems, Competency, and Outcomes", our breakout session critically evaluated the cost benefit and return on investment of simulation. In this paper we provide an overview of some of the economic tools that a clinician may use to present the value of simulation training to financial officers and other administrators in the economic terms they understand. We also define three themes as a call to action for research related to cost benefit analysis in simulation as well as four specific research questions that will help guide educators and hospital leadership to make decisions on the value of simulation for their system or program. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Quantitative Analysis of the Content of EMS Handoff of Critically Ill and Injured Patients to the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Patient handoff occurs when responsibility for patient diagnosis, treatment, or ongoing care is transferred from one healthcare professional to another. Patient handoff is an integral component of quality patient care and is increasingly identified as a potential source of medical error. However, evaluation of handoff from field providers to ED personnel is limited. We here present a quantitative analysis of the information transferred from EMS providers to ED physicians during handoff of critically ill and injured patients. METHODS: This study was conducted at an urban academic medical center with an emergency department census of greater than 100,000 visits annually. All patients arriving to our institution by EMS and meeting predefined triage criteria are brought immediately to the ED resuscitation area upon EMS arrival. Handoff from EMS to ED providers occurring in the resuscitation area was observed and audio recorded by trained research assistants and subsequently coded for content. The emergency department team as well as EMS were blinded to study design. RESULTS: Ninety patient handoffs were evaluated. In 78% (95%CI = 70.0-86.7) of all handoffs, EMS provided a chief concern. In 58% (95%CI = 47.7-67.7) of handoffs EMS provided a description of the scene and in 57% (95%CI = 46.7-66.7) they provided a complete set of vital signs. In 47% (95%CI = 31.3-57.5) of handoffs pertinent physical exam findings were described. The EMS provider gave an overall assessment of the patient's clinical status in 31% (95%CI = 21.6-40.3) of cases. Significantly more paramedic handoffs included vital signs (70% vs. 37%, χ2 = 9.69, p = 0.002) and physical exam findings (63% vs. 23%, χ2 = 14.11, p < 0.001). Paramedics were more likely to provide an overall assessment (39% vs. 17%, χ2 = 4.71, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: While patient handoff is a critical component of safe and effective patient care, our study confirms previous literature demonstrating poor quality handoff from EMS to ED providers in critically ill and injured patients. Our analysis demonstrates the need for further training in the provision of patient handoff.

Are Live Ultrasound Models Replaceable? Traditional versus Simulated Education Module for FAST Exam.

INTRODUCTION: The focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) is a commonly used and life-saving tool in the initial assessment of trauma patients. The recommended emergency medicine (EM) curriculum includes ultrasound and studies show the additional utility of ultrasound training for medical students. EM clerkships vary and often do not contain formal ultrasound instruction. Time constraints for facilitating lectures and hands-on learning of ultrasound are challenging. Limitations on didactics call for development and inclusion of novel educational strategies, such as simulation. The objective of this study was to compare the test, survey, and performance of ultrasound between medical students trained on an ultrasound simulator versus those trained via traditional, hands-on patient format. METHODS: This was a prospective, blinded, controlled educational study focused on EM clerkship medical students. After all received a standardized lecture with pictorial demonstration of image acquisition, students were randomized into two groups: control group receiving traditional training method via practice on a human model and intervention group training via practice on an ultrasound simulator. Participants were tested and surveyed on indications and interpretation of FAST and training and confidence with image interpretation and acquisition before and after this educational activity. Evaluation of FAST skills was performed on a human model to emulate patient care and practical skills were scored via objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with critical action checklist. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between control group (N=54) and intervention group (N=39) on pretest scores, prior ultrasound training/education, or ultrasound comfort level in general or on FAST. All students (N=93) showed significant improvement from pre- to post-test scores and significant improvement in comfort level using ultrasound in general and on FAST (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between groups on OSCE scores of FAST on a live model. Overall, no differences were demonstrated between groups trained on human models versus simulator. DISCUSSION: There was no difference between groups in knowledge based ultrasound test scores, survey of comfort levels with ultrasound, and students' abilities to perform and interpret FAST on human models. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that an ultrasound simulator is a suitable alternative method for ultrasound education. Additional uses of ultrasound simulation should be explored in the future.

Interns' success with clinical procedures in infants after simulation training.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Simulation-based medical education (SBME) is used to teach residents. However, few studies have evaluated its clinical impact. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of an SBME session on pediatric interns' clinical procedural success. METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted at 10 academic medical centers. Interns were surveyed on infant lumbar puncture (ILP) and child intravenous line placement (CIV) knowledge and watched audiovisual expert modeling of both procedures. Participants were randomized to SBME mastery learning for ILP or CIV and for 6 succeeding months reported clinical performance for both procedures. ILP success was defined as obtaining a sample on the first attempt with <1000 red blood cells per high-power field or fluid described as clear. CIV success was defined as placement of a functioning catheter on the first try. Each group served as the control group for the procedure for which they did not receive the intervention. RESULTS: Two-hundred interns participated (104 in the ILP group and 96 in the CIV group). Together, they reported 409 procedures. ILP success rates were 34% (31 of 91) for interns who received ILP mastery learning and 34% (25 of 73) for controls (difference: 0.2% [95% confidence interval: -0.1 to 0.1]). The CIV success rate was 54% (62 of 115) for interns who received CIV mastery learning compared with 50% (58 of 115) for controls (difference: 3% [95% confidence interval: -10 to 17]). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in a single SBME mastery learning session was insufficient to affect pediatric interns' subsequent procedural success.

The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation using supraglottic airways and intraosseous devices: a simulation trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess whether using interventions such as laryngeal mask airways (LMA) and IO lines lead to improved resuscitation in a simulated cardiac arrest when compared to standard methods of endotracheal intubation (ETI) and central line placement. METHODS: Emergency Medicine residents at a single academic center were grouped into teams of four. Each team participated in two simulated ventricular fibrillation cardiac arrests using a high fidelity simulator. Peripheral IV access was unobtainable. Only ETI supplies and a central line kit were available in one case (control) and in the other case those supplies were replaced by an LMA and an EZ-IO drill kit (experimental). Groups were randomized to which set up they were given first. Data examined included time to airway placement, duration and success rate of airway placement, time to vascular access, time to defibrillation, and percent hands off time. RESULTS: 44 residents in 11 teams participated. Mean time to airway was shorter in the experimental group (122.8 seconds (s) vs. 265.6 s, p=0.001). Mean duration of airway attempt was also shorter (7.6 s vs. 22.7 s, p=0.002). Time to access was shorter in the experimental group (49.0 s vs. 194.6 s, p=<0.001). Time to defibrillation and percent hands off time did not significantly differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Use of an LMA and an IO device led to significantly faster establishment of an airway and vascular access in a simulated cardiac arrest. The variation in devices did not affect time to defibrillation or percent hands off time.

Advanced medical simulation applications for emergency medicine microsystems evaluation and training.

Participants in the 2008 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference "The Science of Simulation in Healthcare: Defining and Developing Clinical Expertise" morning workshop session on developing systems expertise were tasked with evaluating best applications of simulation techniques and technologies to small-scale systems in emergency medicine (EM). We collaborated to achieve several objectives: 1) describe relevant theories and terminology for discussion of health care systems and medical simulation, 2) review prior and ongoing efforts employing systems thinking and simulation programs in general medical sectors and acute care medicine, 3) develop a framework for discussion of systems thinking for EM, and 4) explore the rational application of advanced medical simulation methods to a defined framework of EM microsystems (EMMs) to promote a "quality-by-design" approach. This article details the materials compiled and questions raised during the consensus process, and the resulting simulation application framework, with proposed solutions as well as their limitations for EM systems education and improvement.

An unusual case of a central nervous system tumor presenting as a chief complaint of depression.

Patients presenting to the emergency department with a psychiatric chief complaint often undergo a medical clearance examination. There is much debate in the literature as to the value of routine laboratory and other diagnostic studies in the initial evaluation of these patients. We report on a patient presenting to the pediatric emergency department with a chief complaint of depression who ultimately was found to have diabetes insipidus and a primary intracranial germ cell tumor. Although a rare outcome to a relatively common scenario in the emergency department, this case underscores the value of a detailed history, careful physical examination, and consideration of laboratory and other diagnostic studies in patients presenting to the emergency department for psychiatric evaluation.