Technology-enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis 1991-2021.

Background: Over the past decade, the use of technology-enhanced simulation in emergency medicine (EM) education has grown, yet we still lack a clear understanding of its effectiveness. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesize studies evaluating the comparative effectiveness of technology-enhanced simulation in EM. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify EM simulation research that compares technology-enhanced simulation with other instructional modalities. Two reviewers screened articles for inclusion and abstracted information on learners, clinical topics, instructional design features, outcomes, cost, and study quality. Standardized mean difference (SMD) effect sizes were pooled using random effects. Results: We identified 60 studies, enrolling at least 5279 learners. Of these, 23 compared technology-enhanced simulation with another instructional modality (e.g., living humans, lecture, small group), and 37 compared two forms of technology-enhanced simulation. Compared to lecture or small groups, we found simulation to have nonsignificant differences for time skills (SMD 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.23 to 0.89, n = 3), but a large, significant effect for non-time skills (SMD 0.82, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.46, n = 8). Comparison of alternative types of technology-enhanced simulation found favorable associations with skills acquisition, of moderate magnitude, for computer-assisted guidance (compared to no computer-assisted guidance), for time skills (SMD 0.50, 95% CI -1.66 to 2.65, n = 2) and non-time skills (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.80, n = 6), and for more task repetitions (time skills SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.86, n = 2) and active participation (compared to observation) for time skills (SMD 0.85, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.45, n = 2) and non-time skills (SMD 0.33 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58, n = 3). Conclusions: Technology-enhanced simulation is effective for EM learners for skills acquisition. Features such as computer-assisted guidance, repetition, and active learning are associated with greater effectiveness.

Comparison of Mental Health Visits at a Military Treatment Facility Emergency Department Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of quantitative research regarding the effect of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) on Emergency Department (ED) visits in the United States, and specifically mental health-related ED visits. The small existing body of research describes an overall decline in ED visits worldwide; however, there are anecdotal reports that psychiatric complaints to the ED have increased during the pandemic. The primary objective of this study was to describe the volume of mental health ED visits at a single ED during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previous years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective chart review of adult patients evaluated in the ED at an academic military medical facility from March to December of 2017-2020 for mental health. The electronic medical record was queried for mental health International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision diagnosis codes. Demographic data including age, gender, disposition, diagnosis, and beneficiary status were collected, and Pearson Chi-Square was used to assess for statistical significance between years. RESULTS: There was a total of 1,486 mental health ED visits from March to December 2020, compared to an average of 1,668 visits from March to December 2017-2019. Statistically significant (P < 0.05) differences, between 2020 and the prior 3 years combined, were identified in the categories of age, disposition, beneficiary status, and diagnosis. In 2020, there was a lower proportion of visits for patients aged ≥60 (1.2%) than in 2017-2019 (2.5%). Active-duty patients comprised a higher proportion of mental health visits in 2020 (82.4%) versus 2017-2019 (77%). Proportionately fewer patients were admitted in 2020 (25.2%) versus 2017-2019 (29.2%). Adjustment disorders made up 19.0% of visits in 2020 versus 23.2% in 2017-2019, and suicidal ideation and intentional self-inflicted injury comprised 43.3% in 2020 compared with 40.4% in 2017-2019. CONCLUSION: There was a significant decline in ED visits for patients over the age of 60 but a significant increase in visits for active-duty patients. Fewer patients were admitted compared to previous years. There was a significant increase in patients diagnosed with suicidal ideation and intentional self-inflicted injury in 2020 compared to previous years. Alarmingly, this study shows increased rates of self-harm and suicidal ideation. Further study is needed to determine why these effects were seen and if there is a higher risk for suicide attempt or completion in these populations. These results indicate that military leadership and the military health system is failing to adequately support and protect service members and their families during these uniquely stressful times. High-level attention to this issue by military leadership is required; the readiness and safety of the nation's fighting force is at stake.

Feasibility of Obtaining Intraosseous and Intravenous Access Using Night Vision Goggle Focusing Adaptors.

BACKGROUND: The optimal tactical lighting for performing medical procedures under low-light conditions is unclear. METHODS: United States Navy medical personnel (N = 23) performed intravenous (IV) and intraosseous (IO) procedures on mannequins using a tactical headlamp, night vision goggles (NVGs), and night vision goggles with focusing adaptors (NVG+A) utilizing a randomized within-subjects design. Procedure success, time to completion, and user preferences were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and nonparametric statistics at p < .05. RESULTS: IV success rates were significantly greater for the headlamp (74%) than for NVG (35%; p < .03) and somewhat greater than for NVG+A (52%; p = .18). IO success rates were high under each lighting condition (96% to 100%). Time to completion was significantly faster using headlamp (IV, 106 ± 28 s; IO, 47 ± 11 s) than NVG (IV, 168 ± 80 s; IO, 56 ± 17 s) or NVG-A (IV, 157 ± 52 s; IO, 59 ± 27 s; each p < .01). Posttesting confidence on a 1-to-5 scale was somewhat higher for NVG+A (IV, 2.9 ± 0.2; IO, 4.2 ± 0.2) than for NVG (IV, 2.6 ± 0.2; IO, 4.0 ± 0.2). Participants cited concerns with NVG+A depth perception and with adjusting the adaptors, and that the adaptors were not integrated into the NVG. CONCLUSION: While this mannequin study was limited by laboratory conditions and by the lack of practice opportunities, we found some small advantages of focusing adaptors over NVG alone but not over headlamp for IV and IO access in low-light conditions.

Leaving the Skin Incision Open May Not Be as Beneficial as We Have Been Taught.

BACKGROUND: Currently, various methods of skin closures are used in contaminated and dirty abdominal wounds without solid, evidence-based guidance. This study investigates whether closure methods affect surgical site infection (SSI) and other incisional complications. We hypothesize that open management of the skin would have the lowest complications, including SSI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients age ≥18 who underwent trauma laparotomy (TL) or damage control laparotomy (DCL) from 2008-2013 and had class III/IV wounds were included. Demographic, injury, treatment, and outcome variables were compared based on skin closure methods: Primary closure, intermittently stapled with wicks, or open management. Subgroup analyses for TL, DCL, and high-risk patients with stomach, colon, or rectal injuries were performed. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression (MLR) analyses were performed to identify risk factors for superficial/deep SSI and surgical incision complications. RESULTS: A total of 348 patients were included. The median age was 47 years; 14% were female; 21% had blunt injuries. Overall SSI was highest for open incisions (p < 0.05), but there was no difference in superficial/deep SSI. Primary closures healed a median of 20 days, compared with 68 and 71 days for the intermittently stapled and open groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Primary closure in TL and high-risk patients also had the lowest SSI rates (all p < 0.05), but there were no differences in superficial/deep SSI in any subgroup. In TL patients, diabetes mellitus and colon injuries were independently associated with the development of superficial/deep SSI and surgical incision complications; however, skin closure method was not. CONCLUSION: In class III and IV wounds, primary closure was associated with the lowest SSI, shortest length of stay and healing time. Method of skin closure, however, did not have an independent effect on the development of superficial/deep SSI or surgical incision complications. These suggest that primary skin closure in contaminated and dirty abdominal wounds may be performed more safely than commonly perceived.