Kessler, David

OBJECTIVES To describe the quality of pediatric resuscitative care in general emergency departments (GEDs) and to determine hospital-level factors associated with higher quality. METHODS Prospective observational study of resuscitative care provided to 3 in situ simulated patients (infant seizure, infant sepsis, and child cardiac arrest) by interprofessional GED teams. A composite quality score (CQS) was measured and the association of this score with modifiable and nonmodifiable hospital-level factors was explored. RESULTS A median CQS of 62.8 of 100 (interquartile range 50.5–71.1) was noted for 287 resuscitation teams from 175 emergency departments. In the unadjusted analyses, a higher score was associated with the modifiable factor of an affiliation with a pediatric academic medical center (PAMC) and the nonmodifiable factors of higher pediatric volume and location in the Northeast and Midwest. In the adjusted analyses, a higher CQS was associated with modifiable factors of an affiliation with a PAMC and the designation of both a nurse and physician pediatric emergency care coordinator, and nonmodifiable factors of higher pediatric volume and location in the Northeast and Midwest. A weak correlation was noted between quality and pediatric readiness scores. CONCLUSIONS A low quality of pediatric resuscitative care, measured using simulation, was noted across a cohort of GEDs. Hospital factors associated with higher quality included: an affiliation with a PAMC, designation of a pediatric emergency care coordinator, higher pediatric volume, and geographic location. A weak correlation was noted between quality and pediatric readiness scores.

AbstractObjectivesParamedics and emergency medical technicians (EMTs) perform triage at disaster sites. There is a need for disaster triage training. Live simulation training is costly and difficult to deliver. Screen‐based simulations may overcome these training barriers. We hypothesized that a screen‐based simulation, 60 Seconds to Survival (60S), would be associated with in‐game improvements in triage accuracy.MethodsThis was a prospective cohort study of a screen‐based simulation intervention, 60S. Participants included emergency medical services (EMS) personnel from 21 EMS agencies across 12 states. Participants performed assessments (e.g., check for pulse) and actions (e.g., reposition the airway) for 12 patients in each scenario and assigned color‐coded triage levels (red, yellow, green, or black) to each patient. Participants received on‐screen feedback about triage performance immediately after each scenario. A scoring system was designed to encourage accurate and timely triage decisions. Participants who played 60S included practicing EMTs, paramedics, and nurses as well as students studying to assume these roles. Participants played the game at least three times over 13 weeks.ResultsIn total, 2,234 participants began game play and 739 completed the study and were included in the analysis. Overall, the median number of plays of the game was just above the threshold inclusion criteria (three or more plays) with a median of four plays during the study period (interquartile range [IQR] = 3–7). There was a significant difference in triage accuracy from the first play of the game to the last play of the game. Median baseline triage accuracy in the game was 89.7% (IQR = 82.1%–94.9%), which then increased to a median of 100% at the last game play (IQR = 87.5%–100.0%; p < 0.001). There was some variability in median triage accuracy on fourth through 11th game plays, ranging from 95% to 100%, and on the 12th to 16th plays, the median accuracy was sustained at 100%. There was a significant decrease in the rate of undertriage: from 10.3% (IQR = 5.1%–18.0%) to 0 (IQR = 0%–12.5%; p < 0.001).Conclusion60 Seconds to Survival is associated with improved in‐game triage accuracy. Further study of the correlation between in‐game triage accuracy and improvements in live simulation or real‐world triage decisions is warranted.

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 &lt;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.