Search

Interprofessional simulation-based education is effective for learning non-technical critical care skills and strengthening interprofessional team collaboration to optimize quality of care and patient outcome. Implementation of interprofessional simulation sessions in initial and continuing education is facilitated by a team of "champions" from each discipline/profession to ensure educational quality and logistics. Interprofessional simulation training must be integrated into a broader interprofessional curriculum supported by managers, administrators and clinical colleagues from different professional programs. When conducting interprofessional simulation training, it is essential to account for sociological factors (hierarchy, power, authority, interprofessional conflicts, gender, access to information, professional identity) both in scenario design and debriefing. Teamwork assessment tools in interprofessional simulation training may be used to guide debriefing. The interprofessional simulation setting (in-situ or simulation centre) will be chosen according to the learning objectives and the logistics.

Personalized medicine aims to improve outcomes through application of therapy directed by individualized risk profiles. Whether personalized risk assessment is routinely applied in practice is unclear; the impact of personalized preoperative risk prediction and communication on outcomes has not been synthesized. Our objective was to perform a scoping review to examine the extent, range, and nature of studies where personalized risk was evaluated preoperatively and communicated to the patient and/or healthcare professional. A systematic search was developed, peer-reviewed, and applied to Embase, Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases to identify studies of individuals having or considering surgery, where a process to assess personalized risk was applied and where these estimates were communicated to a patient and/or healthcare professional. All stages of the review were completed in duplicate. We narratively synthesized and described identified themes. We identified 796 studies; 24 underwent full-text review. Seven studies were included; one communicated personalized risk to patients, four to a healthcare professional, and two to both. Cardiac (n = 2) and orthopedic surgery (n = 2) were the most common surgical specialties. Four studies used electronic risk calculators, and three used paper-based tools. Personalized preoperative risk assessment and communication may improve accuracy of information provided to patients, improve consent processes, and influence length of stay. Methodologic weaknesses in study design were common. Personalized preoperative risk assessment and communication may improve patient and system outcomes. This evidence is limited, however, by weaknesses in study design. Appropriately powered, low risk of bias evaluation of personalized risk communication before surgery is needed.

Communication failures are often at the root of adverse events for surgical patients; however, evidence to inform best communication practice in the operating room is relatively limited. This narrative review outlines the importance of interprofessional communication for surgical patient safety, maps its barriers and facilitators, and highlights key strategies for enhancing communication quality in the operating room. Based on this review, a research agenda to inform best practices in interprofessional operating room communication is suggested.The non-systematic literature search included searches of relevant databases (Medline (via OVID), PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL), relevant grey literature sources (e.g., patient safety institute websites), and reference lists of selected articles.Effective interprofessional communication plays a critical role in the operating room, but faces many challenges at the individual, team, environmental, and organizational level. Factors that support effective communication are less documented than barriers, but include team integration, flattened hierarchies, and structure/standardization. Checklists, safety briefings, and teamwork/communication training are the most common techniques used to improve communication in the operating room. Of all communication techniques, closed-loop communication may be the most practical and inexpensive strategy.The perioperative community should be encouraged to implement existing effective solutions to improve communication and investigate creative solutions to identified barriers. Improved methods of data collection are needed to enhance evidence quality, increase understanding of communication barriers and facilitators, and identify the best strategy to advance practice.RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les problèmes de communication sont souvent à l’origine des événements indésirables pour les patients chirurgicaux, et les données probantes pour guider les meilleures pratiques de communication en salle d’opération sont encore relativement limitées. Ce compte rendu narratif souligne l’importance de la communication interprofessionnelle pour la sécurité des patients chirurgicaux, cartographie ses obstacles et les éléments la facilitant, et présente des stratégies clés pour améliorer la qualité de la communication en salle d’opération. Sur la base de ce compte rendu, un agenda de recherche visant à guider les meilleures pratiques en matière de communication interprofessionnelle en salle d’opération est proposé.Notre recherche de littérature non méthodique s’est intéressée aux bases de données pertinentes (Medline (via OVID), PubMed, Scopus, et EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL), aux sources pertinentes de la littérature grise (par ex., sites Internet des instituts sur la sécurité des patients), et aux listes de références des articles sélectionnés.Une communication interprofessionnelle efficace joue un rôle crucial en salle d’opération, mais elle est souvent mise à l’épreuve tant aux niveaux de l’individu, de l’équipe, de l’environnement que de l’organisation. Les facteurs facilitant une communication efficace sont moins documentés que les obstacles; ils comprennent l’intégration de l’équipe, une structure organisationnelle horizontale et la structure/standardisation. Les listes de contrôle, les réunions sur la sécurité et la formation en travail d’équipe/communications sont les techniques les plus fréquemment utilisées pour améliorer la communication en salle d’opération. Parmi toutes les techniques de communication, la communication en circuit fermé pourrait constituer la stratégie la plus pratique et la moins onéreuse.La communauté périopératoire devrait être encouragée à appliquer les solutions existantes ayant prouvé leur efficacité afin d’améliorer la communication et explorer des solutions créatives pour pallier les obstacles identifiés. De meilleures méthodes de collecte de données sont nécessaires pour améliorer la qualité des données probantes, augmenter la compréhension des obstacles et des aides à la communication, et identifier les meilleures stratégies pour améliorer la pratique.

Objective To validate the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) system for assessment of the collective surgical teams' nontechnical skills after observing recordings of actual OR environment. Background The NOTSS system is a widely accepted tool to measure nontechnical skills of individual surgeons, and has mostly been used in the simulated setting. Surgical procedures are rarely performed by a single surgeon, but by a surgical team of attending surgeons, surgical assistants, and surgical trainees. Therefore, assessment of nontechnical skills may benefit from holistic assessment of the collective surgical teams. Methods Five trained participants assessed surgical team and attending surgeon using the NOTSS system after watching ten 20-minute long videos obtained from live OR. A set of reference ratings was provided by a multidisciplinary expert committee. We performed analyses to assess system sensitivity; examine inter-rater reliability of ratings; investigate concurrent construct validity; and assess feasibility and acceptability of using the NOTSS system to measure surgical team performance. Results There was adequate system sensitivity when comparing participants' and reference ratings. Inter-rater reliability among the participants' ratings was good except for decision-making category. The level of inter-rater reliability was similar when rating teams and attending surgeons. There was strong positive correlation between teams' and attending surgeons' NOTSS ratings at category [Pearson coefficient 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.89] and element levels (0.83, 95% CI 0.80-0.85), demonstrating evidence of concurrent construct validity. The participants felt that the use of NOTSS system to measure teams' nontechnical skills was acceptable and feasible to a fair extent. Conclusion The NOTSS system, although developed for assessment of individual surgeons, is a useful tool for observing and rating surgical teams.

Purpose Direct observation is essential to assess and provide feedback to medical trainees. However, calls for its increased use in medical training persist as learners report that direct observation occurs infrequently. This study applied a theory-driven approach to systematically investigate barriers and enablers to direct observation in residency training. Method From September 2016 to July 2017, semistructured interviews of faculty and residents at The Ottawa Hospital were conducted and analyzed. An interview guide based on the theoretical domains framework (TDF) was used to capture 14 domains that may influence direct observation. Interview transcripts were independently coded using direct content analysis, and specific beliefs were generated by grouping similar responses. Relevant domains were identified based on the frequencies of beliefs reported, presence of conflicting beliefs, and perceived influence on direct observation practices. Results Twenty-five interviews (12 residents, 13 faculty) were conducted, representing 10 specialties. Ten TDF domains were identified as influencing direct observation: knowledge, skills, beliefs about consequences, social/professional role and identity, intention, goals, memory/attention/decision processes, environmental context and resources, social influences, and behavioral regulation. Discord between faculty and resident intentions, coupled with social expectations that residents should be responsible for ensuring that observations occur, was identified as a key barrier. Additionally, competing demands identified across multiple TDF domains emerged as a pervasive theme. Conclusions This study identified key barriers and enablers to direct observation. These influencing factors provide a basis for the development of potential strategies aimed at embedding direct observation as a routine pedagogical practice in residency training.

Introduction Frailty is a robust predictor of adverse outcomes in older people. Practice guidelines recommend routine screening for frailty; however, this does not occur regularly. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a validated, feasible instrument that can be used in a variety of clinical settings and is associated with many adverse outcomes. Our objective was to develop and evaluate an online training module to guide frailty assessment using the CFS. Methods A multidisciplinary team of clinical experts developed an evidence-based, theory-grounded online training module for users who wished to perform frailty assessment using the CFS. The module was prospectively evaluated for user satisfaction, effectiveness and feasibility using a standardised questionnaire. Qualitative feedback was analysed with thematic analysis. Results Version 1 of the CFS module was used 627 times from 21 October 2019 to 24 March 2020. Satisfaction, effectiveness and feasibility of the module were positively rated (≥4/5 on a 5-point Likert scale n = 582 [93%], n = 507, [81%], n = 575, [91%], respectively). Qualitative feedback highlighted ease of use, likelihood of users to share the module with others and opportunities to increase multimedia content. Conclusion An online tutorial, designed using evidence and theory to guide frailty assessment using the CFS, was positively rated by users. The module’s content and structure was rated effective and feasible, and users were satisfied with, and likely to share, the module. Research evaluating the module’s impact on the accuracy of frailty assessment is required.

Background Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) corrects tissue hypoxia, mobilizes stem cells and has immunomodulatory effects, all of which are key mechanisms for healing wounds. A number of studies have suggested that HBOT may be effective for healing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Aims Our systematic review aimed to quantify the effectiveness and safety of HBOT in IBD and its associated conditions. Methods We performed a proportional meta-analysis. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched from inception through November 2020 with no language restriction. We included randomized controlled studies, cohort studies and case series that contained a minimum of three patients and reported effectiveness and/or safety outcomes for HBOT in patients with IBD. Studies were stratified by IBD phenotype and weighted summary estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for clinical response and remission using random-effects models. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and a modified version of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) checklist for observational studies. Results Nineteen studies met our study criteria: 3 randomized controlled trials and 16 case series. The studies reported outcomes for luminal ulcerative colitis (UC) (n=373), luminal Crohn’s disease (CD) (n=250), enterocutaneous fistulae (ECF) (n=21), perianal CD (n=115), pouch disorders (n=60), pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) (n=5) and perianal sinus/metastatic CD (n=7). Rates of clinical response were 86% (95% CI, 66–95%) for luminal UC, 86% (95% CI, 81–90%) for luminal CD, 85% (95% CI, 61–95%) for ECF, 80% (95% CI, 70–87%) for perianal CD, 65% (95% CI, 52–76%) for pouch disorders, 92% (95% CI, 38–99%) for PG and 79% (95% CI, 36–96%) for perianal sinus/metastatic CD. Rates of clinical remission were 87% (95% CI, 10–100%) for luminal UC, 88% for luminal CD (95% CI, 46–98%), 50% for ECF (95% CI, 12–88%), 64% (95% CI, 52–75%) for perianal CD, 31% (95% CI, 16–50%) for pouch disorders, 92% (95% CI, 38–100%) for PG and 65% (95% CI, 10–97%) for perianal sinus/metastatic CD. Of the ten studies that reported on safety of HBOT, 19 patients (10.5%) had minor adverse events and no major event was reported. Study quality was low in the majority of studies due to an absence of comparator arms, inadequate description of interventions, and poorly defined outcomes. Conclusions Limited high-quality evidence suggest that HBOT is safe and associated with high rates of clinical response and remission for luminal IBD, perianal CD and pouch disorders. A well-designed large multicenter randomized controlled trial is warranted to confirm the benefit of HBOT in IBD. doi:10.17605/osf.io/gpz6d Funding Agencies None

Background A large proportion of surgical patient harm is preventable; yet, our ability to systematically learn from these incidents and improve clinical practice remains limited. The Operating Room Black Box was developed to address the need for comprehensive assessments of clinical performance in the operating room. It captures synchronized audio, video, patient, and environmental clinical data in real time, which are subsequently analyzed by a combination of expert raters and software-based algorithms. Despite its significant potential to facilitate research and practice improvement, there are many potential implementation challenges at the institutional, clinician, and patient level. This paper summarizes our approach to implementation of the Operating Room Black Box at a large academic Canadian center. Objective We aimed to contribute to the development of evidence-based best practices for implementing innovative technology in the operating room for direct observation of the clinical performance by using the case of the Operating Room Black Box. Specifically, we outline the systematic approach to the Operating Room Black Box implementation undertaken at our center. Methods Our implementation approach included seeking support from hospital leadership; building frontline support and a team of champions among patients, nurses, anesthesiologists, and surgeons; accounting for stakeholder perceptions using theory-informed qualitative interviews; engaging patients; and documenting the implementation process, including barriers and facilitators, using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Results During the 12-month implementation period, we conducted 23 stakeholder engagement activities with over 200 participants. We recruited 10 clinician champions representing nursing, anesthesia, and surgery. We formally interviewed 15 patients and 17 perioperative clinicians and identified key themes to include in an information campaign run as part of the implementation process. Two patient partners were engaged and advised on communications as well as grant and protocol development. Many anticipated and unanticipated challenges were encountered at all levels. Implementation was ultimately successful, with the Operating Room Black Box installed in August 2018, and data collection beginning shortly thereafter. Conclusions This paper represents the first step toward evidence-guided implementation of technologies for direct observation of performance for research and quality improvement in surgery. With technology increasingly being used in health care settings, the health care community should aim to optimize implementation processes in the best interest of health care professionals and patients.

Objective To investigate the effect of therapeutic suggestions played to patients through earphones during surgery on postoperative pain and opioid use. Design Blinded randomised controlled study. Setting Five tertiary care hospitals in Germany. Participants 385 of 400 patients consecutively recruited from January to December 2018 who were to undergo surgery for 1-3 hours under general anaesthesia. In the per protocol analysis 191 patients were included in the intervention group and 194 patients in the control group. Intervention The intervention comprised an audiotape of background music and positive suggestions based on hypnotherapeutic principles, which was played repeatedly for 20 minutes followed by 10 minutes of silence to patients through earphones during general anaesthesia. Patients in the control group were assigned to a blank tape. Main outcome measures The main outcome was dose of opioid administered by patient controlled analgesia or nurse controlled analgesia within the first postoperative 24 hours, based on regular evaluation of pain intensity on a numerical rating scale (range 0-10, with higher scores representing more severe pain). Results Compared with the control group, the intervention group required a significantly (P=0.002) lower opioid dose within 24 hours after surgery, with a median of 4.0 mg (interquartile range 0-8) morphine equivalents versus 5.3 (2-12), and an effect size (Cohen’s d) of 0.36 (95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.56). The number of patients who needed opioids postoperatively was significantly (P=0.001) reduced in the intervention group: 121 of 191 (63%, 95% confidence interval 45% to 70%) patients in the intervention group versus 155 of 194 (80%, 74% to 85%) in the control group. The number needed to treat to avoid postoperative opioids was 6. Pain scores were consistently and significantly lower in the intervention group within 24 hours after surgery, with an average reduction of 25%. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions Therapeutic suggestions played through earphones during general anaesthesia could provide a safe, feasible, inexpensive, and non-drug technique to reduce postoperative pain and opioid use, with the potential for more general use. Based on the finding of intraoperative perception by a considerable number of patients, surgeons and anaesthetists should be careful about background noise and conversations during surgery. Trial registration German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00013800.

Skill retention after neonatal resuscitation training is poor. A distributed learning strategy – where learning is spread over multiple sessions – can improve retention of declarative memory (facts & knowledge). Session timings are critical – maximal retention occurs when a refresher session is scheduled at 10-30% of the time between initial training and test. We hypothesized this also holds true for neonatal resuscitation, a complex skill set requiring both declarative and procedural memory. We conducted a prospective, single-blinded randomized-controlled trial. University of Ottawa residents were recruited to training in neonatal resuscitation, with a high-fidelity simulated pre-test, immediate post-tests, and a retention test at 4 months. After training, they were randomized to either a refresher session at 3 weeks (18% of interval) or at 2 months (50%). Technical and non-technical skills were scored using validated checklists, knowledge with standardized questions. There was no difference between groups prior to the retention test. The early refresher group demonstrated significantly improved technical (mean ± 95% CI: 22.4 ± 1.3 v 18.2 ± 2.5, p = 0.02) and non-technical (31.0 ± 0.9 v 25.6 ± 3.1, p = 0.03) skill scores in the retention post-test compared to the late group. No difference was seen with knowledge scores. We conclude that both technical and non-technical aspects of neonatal resuscitation performance can benefit from an early refresher session. Session timings are critical and should be tailored to the desired length of skill retention. Findings may be generalizable to other interventions that depend on mixed types of memory.

BACKGROUND: Handover of anaesthesia patient care during surgery is common; however, its association with patient outcome is unclear. This systematic review aimed to assess the impact of anaesthesia handover during surgery on patient outcome. METHODS: All prospective and retrospective clinical studies specifically investigating the association of intraoperative transfer of anaesthesia care between anaesthesia providers in the operating room with patient morbidity and mortality were included. Searches were conducted from inception to April 24, 2019 in Medline, Medline in Process, CINAHL, and Embase. Reference lists of included studies were searched. Studies were assessed for eligibility and data were extracted by independent reviewers in duplicate with disagreements resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed in duplicate using the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Data were summarised narratively given substantial heterogeneity. An exploratory meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model for a subset of comparable studies. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies focused on patients as the unit of analysis (n(patients)=605 678) and two focused on anaesthesia providers as the unit of analysis (n(providers)=307). Seven studies identified a relationship between anaesthesia handovers and adverse patient outcomes, whereas one suggested that handover may be beneficial to error detection or rectification. Included studies were of fair or good quality. Meta-analysis of four studies found a 40% increased risk of patients experiencing an adverse event when an anaesthesia handover occurs during the procedure (pooled risk ratio=1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.19 to 1.65; P

BackgroundAt least 1 in 6 COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital and receiving supplemental oxygen will die of complications. More than 50% of patients with COVID-19 that receive invasive treatment such as mechanical ventilation will die in hospital. Such impacts overwhelm the limited intensive care unit resources and may lead to further deaths given inadequate access to care. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is defined as breathing 100% oxygen at a pressure higher than 1.4 atmosphere absolute (ATA). HBOT is safe, including for lungs, when administered by experienced teams and is routinely administrated for a number of approved indications. Preliminary clinical evidence suggests clinical improvement when hypoxemic COVID-19 patients are treated with HBOT.ObjectiveWe aim to determine the effectiveness of HBOT for improving oxygenation, morbidity, and mortality among hypoxemic COVID-19 patients.Methods and analysisThis trial is a sequential Bayesian Parallel-group, individually Randomized, Open, Blinded Endpoint controlled trial. Admitted hypoxemic COVID-19 patients who require supplemental oxygen (without mechanical ventilation) to maintain a satisfying tissue oxygenation will be eligible to participate. The anticipated sample size of 234 patients is informed by data from a treatment trial of COVID patients recently published. The intervention group will receive one HBOT per day at 2.0 ATA for 75 minutes. Daily HBOT will be administered until the patient does not require any oxygen supplementation, requires any type of mechanical ventilation, or until day 10 of treatment. Patients in the control group will receive the current standard of care treatment (no HBOT). The primary outcome of this trial will be the 7-level COVID ordinal outcomes scale assessed on Day 7 post-randomization. Secondary outcomes will include: (a)clinicaloutcomes (length of hospital stay, days with oxygen supplementation, oxygen flow values to obtain a saturation by pulse oximetry ≥90%, intensive care admission and length of stay, days on invasive mechanical ventilation, sleep quality, fatigue, major thrombotic events, the 7-level COVID ordinal outcomes scale on Day 28; mortality, safety); (b)biologicaloutcomes (plasma inflammatory markers); and (c) healthsystemoutcomes (cost of care and cost-effectiveness). Predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria have been specified. The analytical approach for the primary outcome will use a Bayesian proportional odds ordinal logistic semiparametric model. The primary analysis will be by intention-to-treat. Bayesian posterior probabilities will be calculated every 20 patients to assess accumulating evidence for benefit or harm. A planned subgroup analysis will be performed for pre-specified variables known to impact COVID-19 prognosis and/or HBOT (biologic sex and age).DiscussionBased on the mortality rate and substantial burden of COVID-19 on the healthcare system, it is imperative that solutions be found. HBOT is a non-invasive and low-risk intervention when contraindications are respected. The established safety and relatively low cost of providing HBOT along with its potential to improve the prognosis of severe COVID-19 patients make this intervention worth studying, despite the current limited number of HBOT centres. If this trial finds that HBOT significantly improves outcome and prevents further deterioration leading to critical care for severe COVID-19 patients, practice will change internationally. If no benefit is found from the intervention, then the current standard of care (no HBOT) will be supported by level I evidence.Trials RegistrationNCT04500626

Interprofessional simulation (IPS) training is an effective way to learn crisis resource management. The type of debriefing used in IPS training may affect participants' performance and their level of psychological safety. We aimed to assess and compare performance after standard collective debriefing versus a combination of individual and collective debriefing ("combined" approach).Randomized, controlled multicenter trial. IPS sessions were randomized to have either standard or combined debriefing. Each team's performance in the IPS session was assessed with the Team Emergency Assessment Measure. The participants assessed the debriefing quality with the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare.Forty IPS sessions were randomized, and 30 were analyzed, 15 using standard collective debriefing and 15 the combined individual-collective method. Teams' performance improved with both types of debriefing, based on pre-post testing (P.01), and there were no significant differences in overall performance scores between the 2 types of debriefing (P=.64). However, the combined approach was associated with higher scores for leadership skills (P.05) and psychological safety, and the participants' learning experience was better (P.05).During IPS courses on crisis resource management, debriefing improves participants' performance, but similar overall results can be obtained with both debriefing methods. Combined debriefing might be more effective for improving participants' leadership skills and psychological safety and also provide a better learning experience.La simulación interprofesional (SIP) es eficaz para aprender gestión de recursos de crisis. La modalidad de debriefing utilizada en la SIP puede influir en el rendimiento de los participantes y en su integridad psicológica. Se evalúa y compara el rendimiento de un debriefing estándar (DE) –colectivo– con un debriefing combinado (DC) –individual y colectivo– en cursos de SIP en escenarios que simulan pacientes con patología aguda y grave.Ensayo controlado, aleatorizado y multicéntrico. Se aleatorizó el tipo de debriefing realizado (DE o DC) en las sesiones de SIP. El rendimiento del debriefing se evaluó con la escala TEAM (Team Emergency Assessment Measure). La calidad de la SIP fue valorada por los participantes con la escala DASH (Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare©).Se aleatorizaron 40 cursos de SIP de los que se analizaron 30. Quince realizaron DE y 15 DC. Ambos grupos mejoraron entre la pre y la posprueba (p0,01), pero no hubo diferencias en el rendimiento global entre ambas modalidades de debriefing (p = 0,64). El DC obtuvo mejores resultados que el DE en la capacidad de liderazgo (p0,05), en la percepción de seguridad psicológica y en la experiencia de aprendizaje eficaz (p0,05).Durante la SIP en situaciones de crisis, el debriefing mejora el rendimiento de los participantes, sin diferencias entre un DE y un DC. El DC podría ser más efectivo para mejorar la capacidad de liderazgo, la seguridad psicológica y la experiencia del aprendizaje.

Audit and feedback can improve physicians’ practice; however, the most effective type of feedback is unknown. Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is associated with postoperative complications and remains common despite the use of effective and safe warming devices. This study aimed to measure the impact of targeted audit and feedback on anesthesiologists’ intraoperative temperature management and subsequent patient outcomes. This study was a three-arm cluster randomized-controlled trial. Anesthesiologists’ intraoperative temperature management performance was analyzed in two phases. The first was a baseline phase with audit but no feedback for eight months, followed by an intervention phase over the next seven-month period after participants had received interventions according to their randomized group allocation of no feedback (control), benchmarked feedback, or ranked feedback. Anesthesiologists’ percentage of hypothermic patients at the end of surgery (primary endpoint) and use of a warming device were compared among the groups. Forty-five attending anesthesiologists who took care of 7,846 patients over 15 months were included. The odds of hypothermia (temperature < 36°C at the end of surgery) increased significantly from pre- to post-intervention in the control and ranked groups (control odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.56; P = 0.02; ranked OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.56; P = 0.04) but not in the benchmarked group (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.28; P = 0.58). Between-arm differences in pre- to post-intervention changes were not significant (benchmark vs control OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.10; P = 0.19; ranked vs control OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.33, P = 0.94). No significant overall effect on intraoperative warmer use change was detected. We found no evidence to suggest that audit and feedback, using benchmarked or ranked feedback, is more effective than no feedback at all to change anesthesiologists’ intraoperative temperature management performance. Feedback may need to be included in a bundle to produce its effect. www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02414191). Registered 19 March 2015.

Sex and gender, among other equity-related characteristics, influence the process of care and patients’ outcomes. Currently, the extent to which these characteristics are considered in the anesthesia literature remains unknown. This study assesses their incorporation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anesthesia-related interventions, for both patients and healthcare providers. This is a cross-sectional analysis using an existing dataset derived from the anesthesia literature. The dataset originated from a scoping review searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. RCTs investigating the effect of anesthesia-related interventions on mortality for adults undergoing surgery were included. Equity outcome measures were recorded for both patients and providers and assessed for inclusion in the study design, reporting of results, and analysis of intervention effects. Three-hundred sixty-one RCTs (n = 144,674) were included. Most RCTs (91%) reported patient sex/gender, with 58% of patients identified as male. There were 139 studies (39%), where 70% or more of the sample was male, compared to just 14 studies (4%), where 70% or more of the sample was female. Only 10 studies (3%) analyzed results by patient sex/gender, with one reporting a significant effect. There was substantial variation in how age was reported, although nearly all studies (98%) reported some measure of age. For healthcare providers, equity-related information was never available. Better consideration of sex/gender and additional health equity parameters for both patients and providers in RCTs is needed to improve evidence quality, and ultimately, patient care and outcome.

Introduction simulation can be a powerful tool to improve interprofessional teamwork and improve patient outcomes. This manuscript aims to describe a simulation intervention and explore its potential benefits and barriers to its successful implementation to inform future work. Methods this is a prospective observational study. We conducted 22 in situ simulation sessions in the operating room within a General Surgery division. Observations of surgical teams were conducted before the simulation, on the day of the simulation, and 3 to 4 months after the simulation. Team performance was measured using the NOTECHS scale, an instrument designed to assess the non-technical skills of interprofessional teams. Direct observation was used to assess teamwork, and variation in scores was assessed using ANOVA. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants to explore benefits and barriers of the intervention, and analyzed using content analysis. Results no change in team performance was observed using the NOTECHS scale. Participants described not being prepared enough to benefit from the sessions, voiced concerns regarding unequal role of participants in the simulation, and reported a fear of being judged by other team members during the sessions. Conclusion overall, we identified multiple potential barriers to implementation of in situ simulation as interprofessional teamwork training. The challenges identified here can inform the design and implementation of future teamwork training interventions.

BackgroundEffective teamwork between anaesthesiologists and surgeons is essential for optimising patient safety in the cardiac operating room. While many factors may influence the relationship between these two physicians, the role of sex and gender have yet to be investigated.ObjectivesWe sought to determine the association between cardiac physician team sex discordance and patient outcomes.DesignWe performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study.Participants and settingAdult patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and/or aortic, mitral or tricuspid valve surgery between 2008 and 2018 in Ontario, Canada.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was all-cause 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events at 30 days and hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay (LOS). Mixed effects logistic regression was used for categorical outcomes and Poisson regression for continuous outcomes.Results79 862 patients underwent cardiac surgery by 98 surgeons (11.2% female) and 279 anaesthesiologists (23.3% female); 19 893 (24.9%) were treated by sex-discordant physician teams. Physician sex discordance was not associated with overall patient mortality or LOS; however, patients who underwent isolated CABG experienced longer hospital LOS when treated by an all-male physician team as compared with an all-female team (adjusted OR=1.07; p=0.049). When examining the impact of individual physician sex, the length of hospital stay was longer when isolated CABG procedures were attended by a male surgeon (OR=1.10; p=0.004) or anaesthesiologist (OR=1.02; p=0.01).ConclusionsPatient mortality and length of stay after cardiac surgery may vary by sex concordance of the attending surgeon–anaesthesiologist team. Further research is needed to examine the underlying mechanisms of these observed relationships.

Introduction Peripheral venous catheter insertion is a procedural skill that every medical student should master. Training is often limited to a small number of students and is poorly evaluated. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of peer-assisted learning in comparison to instructor-led teaching for peripheral venous catheter insertion training. Methods Students were randomized to the control group attending a traditional instructor-led training session (slideshow and demonstration by an anesthetist instructor, followed by training on a procedural simulator) or to the test group attending a peer-assisted training session (slideshow and demonstration video-recorded by the same instructor, followed by training on a procedural simulator). The primary endpoint was the performance of peripheral venous catheter insertion, assessed on procedural simulator one week later by blinded experts using a standardized 20-item grid. Students self-evaluated their confidence levels using a numeric 10-point scale. Results Eighty-six students were included, 73 of whom attended the assessment session. The median performance score was 12/20 [8–15] in the instructor-led teaching group versus 13/20 [11–15] in the peer-assisted learning group ( P = 0.430). Confidence levels improved significantly after the assessment session and were significantly higher in the peer-assisted learning group (7.6/10 [7.0–8.0] versus 7.0/10 [5.0–8.0], P = 0.026). Conclusion Peer-assisted learning is effective for peripheral venous catheter insertion training and can be as effective as instructor-led teaching. Given the large number of students to train, this finding is important for optimizing the cost-effectiveness of peripheral venous catheter insertion training.

Background Cognitive aids improve the technical performance of individuals and teams dealing with high-stakes crises. Hand-held electronic cognitive aids have rarely been investigated. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the effects of a smartphone application, named MAX (for Medical Assistance eXpert), on the technical and non-technical performance of anaesthesia residents dealing with simulated crises. Methods This single-centre randomized, controlled, unblinded trial was conducted in the simulation centre at Lyon, France. Participants were anaesthesia residents with >1 yr of clinical experience. Each participant had to deal with two different simulated crises with and without the help of a digital cognitive aid. The primary outcome was technical performance, evaluated as adherence to guidelines. Two independent observers remotely assessed performance on video recordings. Results Fifty-two residents were included between July 2015 and February 2016. Six participants were excluded for technical issues; 46 participants were confronted with a total of 92 high-fidelity simulation scenarios (46 with MAX and 46 without). Mean ( sd ) age was 27 (1.8) yr and clinical experience 3.2 (1.0) yr. Inter-rater agreement was 0.89 (95% confidence interval 0.85–0.92). Mean technical scores were higher when residents used MAX [82 (11.9) vs 59 (10.8)%; P Conclusion The use of a hand-held cognitive aid was associated with better technical performance of residents dealing with simulated crises. These findings could help digital cognitive aids to find their way into daily medical practice and improve the quality of health care when dealing with high-stakes crises. Clinical trial registration NCT02678819.

Background and Objectives Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia (UGRA) has become the criterion standard of regional anesthesia practice. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia teaching programs often use simulation, and guidelines have been published to help guide URGA education. This systematic review aimed to examine the effectiveness of simulation-based education for the acquisition and maintenance of competence in UGRA. Methods Studies identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ERIC were included if they assessed simulation-based UGRA teaching with outcomes measured at Kirkpatrick level 2 (knowledge and skills), 3 (transfer of learning to the workplace), or 4 (patient outcomes). Two authors independently reviewed all identified references for eligibility, abstracted data, and appraised quality. Results After screening 176 citations and 45 full-text articles, 12 studies were included. Simulation-enhanced training improved knowledge acquisition (Kirkpatrick level 2) when compared with nonsimulation training. Seven studies measuring skill acquisition (Kirkpatrick level 2) found that simulation-enhanced UGRA training was significantly more effective than alternative teaching methods or no intervention. One study measuring transfer of learning into the clinical setting (Kirkpatrick level 3) found no difference between simulation-enhanced UGRA training and non–simulation-based training. However, this study was discontinued early because of technical challenges. Two studies examined patient outcomes (Kirkpatrick level 4), and one of these found that simulation-based UGRA training improved patient outcomes compared with didactic teaching. Conclusions Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia knowledge and skills significantly improved with simulation training. The acquired UGRA skills may be transferred to the clinical setting; however, further studies are required to confirm these changes translate to improved patient outcomes.

While the operating room (OR) has significantly benefited from aviation strategies to improve safety, the rate of avoidable human errors remains relatively high. One key aviation strategy that has yet to be formally established in the OR is the "sterile cockpit" rule, which prohibits all non-essential behaviours during critical moments of a flight. Applying this rule to the OR may enhance patient safety, but the critical moments of surgery need to be defined first.This study used a modified Delphi methodology to determine critical moments during surgery according to OR team members across institutions, professions, and specialties. Analysis occurred after each round. The stopping criterion was consensus on 80% of survey items or no change in the mean score for any individual item between two consecutive rounds.The first round included 304 respondents. Of these, 115 completed the second-round survey, and 75 completed all three rounds (27 nurses, 29 anesthesiologists, 19 surgeons). Critical moments obtained by consensus were: induction of anesthesia; emergence from anesthesia; preoperative briefing; final counts at the end of the procedure; anesthesiologist- or surgeon-relevant intraoperative event; handovers; procedure-specific high-risk surgical moments; crisis resource management situations; medication and equipment preparation; and key medication administration.By defining the most critical moments of surgery, future research can determine the relative importance of behaviour and actions at each stage and target interventions to these stages.RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Alors que la salle d’opération (SOP) bénéficie considérablement des stratégies de l’aviation pour améliorer la sécurité, le taux d’erreurs humaines évitables y demeure relativement élevé. L’une des stratégies clés de l’aviation qui doit encore être mise en place de manière formelle en SOP est la règle de la « cabine de pilotage stérile », qui interdit tout comportement non essentiel pendant les moments critiques d’un vol. L’application de cette règle à la SOP pourrait améliorer la sécurité des patients, mais les moments critiques d’une chirurgie doivent d’abord être définis. MéTHODE: Cette étude a utilisé une méthodologie Delphi modifiée afin de déterminer les moments critiques pendant une chirurgie selon les membres des équipes de SOP en provenance de différentes institutions, professions et spécialités. Une analyse a eu lieu après chaque itération. Le critère d’arrêt était un consensus sur 80 % des items du sondage ou aucun changement dans la note moyenne obtenue pour n’importe quel item individuel entre deux itérations consécutives. RéSULTATS: La première série a inclus 304 répondants. Parmi ceux-ci, 115 ont complété le deuxième sondage, et 75 ont complété les trois séries de questions (27 infirmiers/infirmières, 29 anesthésiologistes, 19 chirurgiens/chirurgiennes). Les moments critiques retenus par consensus étaient : l’induction de l’anesthésie; l’émergence de l’anesthésie; le temps d’arrêt préopératoire; les décomptes finaux à la fin de l’intervention; les événements peropératoires importants pour l’anesthésiologiste ou le chirurgien; les transferts; les moments chirurgicaux à risque élevé spécifiques à l’intervention; les situations de gestion de crise des ressources; la préparation des médicaments et du matériel; et l’administration de médicaments clés. CONCLUSION: En définissant les moments les plus critiques de la chirurgie, les recherches futures pourront déterminer l’importance relative des comportements et des actes à chaque étape et cibler les interventions en fonction de ces étapes.

Patient outcome during an obstetrical emergency depends on prompt coordination of an interprofessional team. The cognitive aids with roles defined (CARD) is a cognitive aid that addresses the issue of teamwork in crisis management. This study evaluated the clinical impact of implementing the CARD cognitive aid during emergency Cesarean deliveries.We conducted a prospective before-and-after cohort trial at the maternity units of two Canadian academic hospital campuses. Both sites received didactic online training regarding teamwork during crises, which involved training on using CARD for the "CARD" campus (intervention) and no mention of CARD at the "no CARD" campus (control). The primary outcome was the total time to delivery after the call for an emergency Cesarean delivery. Secondary outcomes included specific intervals of time within the time to delivery and clinical outcomes for both the babies and mothers.We analyzed data from 267 eligible emergency Cesarean deliveries that occurred between January 11 2014 and December 31 2017. The use of CARD did not significantly change the median [interquartile range] time to delivery of the baby during an emergency Cesarean delivery from the pre-intervention to the post-intervention time period (17 [12-28] vs 15 [13-20], respectively; median difference, 2; 95% confidence interval, -1 to 5; P = 0.36). The clinical outcomes for the baby or the mother and other secondary outcomes also did not change.The CARD cognitive aid did not significantly improve time-based or clinical maternal and neonatal outcomes of emergency Cesarean delivery at our academic maternity unit.RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les devenirs des patientes pendant les urgences obstétricales dépendent de la coordination rapide d’une équipe interprofessionnelle. Le système CARD (Cognitive Aids with Roles Defined) est un outil de soutien cognitif qui est centré sur le travail d’équipe dans la gestion de crise. Cette étude a évalué l’impact clinique de la mise en œuvre d’un système CARD pendant les accouchements par césarienne d’urgence. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte prospective avant / après dans les services de maternité de deux campus hospitaliers universitaires canadiens. Les deux sites ont eu accès à une formation didactique en ligne portant sur le travail d’équipe pendant les crises; dans le campus « CARD » (groupe intervention), une formation sur l’utilisation du système CARD a été incluse, alors qu’aucune mention du système n’a été faite dans le campus « sans CARD » (groupe témoin). Le critère d’évaluation principal était le délai total jusqu’à l’accouchement après l’appel pour un accouchement par césarienne d’urgence. Les critères secondaires comprenaient les intervalles spécifiques de temps jusqu’à l’accouchement et les pronostics cliniques des bébés et de leurs mères. RéSULTATS: Nous avons analysé les données de 267 accouchements par césarienne d’urgence éligibles survenus entre le 11 janvier 2014 et le 31 décembre 2017. L’utilisation du système CARD n’a pas modifié de manière significative le délai médian [écart interquartile] jusqu’à l’accouchement du bébé pendant un accouchement par césarienne d’urgence tel que mesuré entre le moment pré-intervention et le moment post-intervention (17 [12–28] vs 15 [13–20], respectivement; différence médiane, 2; intervalle de confiance 95 %, −1 à 5; P = 0,36). Les pronostics cliniques des bébés et des mères et les autres critères d’évaluation secondaires n’ont pas non plus été modifiés. CONCLUSION: Le système CARD n’a pas amélioré de façon significative les pronostics maternels et néonatals fondés sur le temps ou la clinique en cas d’accouchement par césarienne d’urgence dans notre service de maternité universitaire.

Introduction: Evidence from many areas of healthcare suggests that skills learned during simulation transfer to clinical settings; however, this has not yet been investigated in hyperbaric medicine. This systematic review aimed to identify, summarize, and assess the impact of simulation-based education in hyperbaric medicine. Methods: Eligible studies investigated the effect of simulation-based education for learning in hyperbaric medicine, used any design, and were published in English in a peer-reviewed journal. Learning outcomes across all Kirkpatrick levels were included. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Pairs of independent reviewers assessed references for study eligibility. Results: We found no article assessing the impact of simulation-based education in hyperbaric medicine published in English. Only one potentially relevant paper published in German was found. Conclusions: More research is needed to determine how the hyperbaric medicine community and their patients may benefit from simulation-based education to optimize both practice and patient care.

BACKGROUND A large proportion of surgical patient harm is preventable; yet, our ability to systematically learn from these incidents and improve clinical practice remains limited. The Operating Room Black Box was developed to address the need for comprehensive assessments of clinical performance in the operating room. It captures synchronized audio, video, patient, and environmental clinical data in real time, which are subsequently analyzed by a combination of expert raters and software-based algorithms. Despite its significant potential to facilitate research and practice improvement, there are many potential implementation challenges at the institutional, clinician, and patient level. This paper summarizes our approach to implementation of the Operating Room Black Box at a large academic Canadian center. OBJECTIVE We aimed to contribute to the development of evidence-based best practices for implementing innovative technology in the operating room for direct observation of the clinical performance by using the case of the Operating Room Black Box. Specifically, we outline the systematic approach to the Operating Room Black Box implementation undertaken at our center. METHODS Our implementation approach included seeking support from hospital leadership; building frontline support and a team of champions among patients, nurses, anesthesiologists, and surgeons; accounting for stakeholder perceptions using theory-informed qualitative interviews; engaging patients; and documenting the implementation process, including barriers and facilitators, using the consolidated framework for implementation research. RESULTS During the 12-month implementation period, we conducted 23 stakeholder engagement activities with over 200 participants. We recruited 10 clinician champions representing nursing, anesthesia, and surgery. We formally interviewed 15 patients and 17 perioperative clinicians and identified key themes to include in an information campaign run as part of the implementation process. Two patient partners were engaged and advised on communications as well as grant and protocol development. Many anticipated and unanticipated challenges were encountered at all levels. Implementation was ultimately successful, with the Operating Room Black Box installed in August 2018, and data collection beginning shortly thereafter. CONCLUSIONS This paper represents the first step toward evidence-guided implementation of technologies for direct observation of performance for research and quality improvement in surgery. With technology increasingly being used in health care settings, the health care community should aim to optimize implementation processes in the best interest of health care professionals and patients.

BackgroundThe labour and delivery environment relies heavily on interdisciplinary collaboration from anaesthesiologists, obstetricians and nurses or midwives to deliver optimal patient care. A large number of adverse events in obstetrics are associated with failure in communication and teamwork among team members, with substantive consequences. The objective of this study is to perform a systematic review of interventions aimed at improving teamwork in obstetrics.MethodsThis systematic review identified and assessed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions aimed at improving teamwork among interdisciplinary teams in obstetrical care. Medline, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Embase were searched for studies evaluating one of: patient outcomes, team performance or processes of clinical efficiency. Identified citations were reviewed in duplicate for eligibility.ResultsNine RCTs met the inclusion criteria; five of these RCTs were conducted under simulated clinical environments. Simulation-based teamwork training interventions were the most represented (n=7 studies, 3047 healthcare providers (HCPs), 107 782 births), followed by checklists (n=1 study, 136 HCPs) and an electronic-based decision support tool (n=1 study, 296 HCPs). Simulation-based teamwork training was found to improve team performance in 100% of relevant studies (3 of 3 studies assessing team performance) and patient morbidity in 75% of relevant studies (3 of 4 studies assessing patient morbidity). However, no direct mortality benefit was identified among all the studies reviewed. Studies were assessed to be of low-moderate quality and had significant limitations in their study designs.ConclusionWhile the evidence is still limited and from low to moderate quality RCTs, simulation-based teamwork interventions appear to improve team performance and patient morbidity in labour and delivery care.PROSPERO Trial registration numberCRD42018090452

BackgroundSystematically observing clinical performance in the operating room (OR) to support patient safety initiatives faces numerous logistical and methodological challenges. These may be solved by new audio-video recording technologies like the OR Black Box, which is a tool similar to black boxes in aviation. This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers that may influence patients’, clinicians’ and senior leadership team members’ support of the OR Black Box in order to guide its future implementation.MethodsPatients, clinicians and senior leadership team members were recruited to participate in semistructured interviews informed by the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify factors relevant to planning OR Black Box implementation. Deidentified interview transcripts were analysed in duplicate following a TDF coding structure.ResultsData saturation was achieved at 15 patients, 17 clinicians and 9 senior leadership team members. Seven domains were relevant for patients, nine for clinicians and four for senior leadership. Knowledge and Beliefs about consequences were barriers and enablers for all three groups. Memory, attention and decision processes and Social influences were enablers for both clinicians and senior leadership. Environmental context and resources, Emotion and Behavioural regulation were found to be barriers and enablers for both clinicians and patients. Social/professional role and identity and Reinforcement were enablers for patients only and Optimism and Intentions were barriers and enablers to clinicians.ConclusionsWhile most stakeholders were supportive of the OR Black Box, we identified many key areas that need to be addressed during its implementation. It is critical to ensure all stakeholders have adequate and accurate information about the OR Black Box system and research goals, and that the OR Black Box is positioned as a patient safety initiative for learning from and improving practice.

To validate the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) system for assessment of the collective surgical teams' nontechnical skills after observing recordings of actual OR environment.The NOTSS system is a widely accepted tool to measure nontechnical skills of individual surgeons, and has mostly been used in the simulated setting. Surgical procedures are rarely performed by a single surgeon, but by a surgical team of attending surgeons, surgical assistants, and surgical trainees. Therefore, assessment of nontechnical skills may benefit from holistic assessment of the collective surgical teams.Five trained participants assessed surgical team and attending surgeon using the NOTSS system after watching ten 20-minute long videos obtained from live OR. A set of reference ratings was provided by a multidisciplinary expert committee. We performed analyses to assess system sensitivity; examine inter-rater reliability of ratings; investigate concurrent construct validity; and assess feasibility and acceptability of using the NOTSS system to measure surgical team performance.There was adequate system sensitivity when comparing participants' and reference ratings. Inter-rater reliability among the participants' ratings was good except for decision-making category. The level of inter-rater reliability was similar when rating teams and attending surgeons. There was strong positive correlation between teams' and attending surgeons' NOTSS ratings at category [Pearson coefficient 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.89] and element levels (0.83, 95% CI 0.80-0.85), demonstrating evidence of concurrent construct validity. The participants felt that the use of NOTSS system to measure teams' nontechnical skills was acceptable and feasible to a fair extent.The NOTSS system, although developed for assessment of individual surgeons, is a useful tool for observing and rating surgical teams.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Aim Simulation training has been shown to be an effective way to teach crisis resource management (CRM) skills. Deliberate practice theory states that learners need to actively practice so that learning is effective. However, many residency programs have limited opportunities for learners to be “active” participants in simulation exercises. This study compares the effectiveness of learning CRM skills when being an active participant versus being an observer participant in simulation followed by a debriefing. Methods Participants were randomized to two groups: active or observer. Active participants managed a simulated crisis scenario (pre-test) while paired observer participants viewed the scenario via video transmission. Then, a trained instructor debriefed participants on CRM principles. On the same day, each participant individually managed another simulated crisis scenario (post-test) and completed a post-test questionnaire. Two independent, blinded raters evaluated all videos using the Ottawa Global Rating Scale (GRS). Results Thirty-nine residents were included in the analysis. Normally distributed data were analyzed using paired and unpaired t -tests. Inter-rater reliability was 0.64. Active participants significantly improved from pre-test to post-test ( P = 0.015). There was no significant difference between the post-test performance of active participants compared to observer participants ( P = 0.12). Conclusion We found that learning CRM principles was not superior when learners were active participants compared to being observers followed by debriefing. These findings challenge the deliberate practice theory claiming that learning requires active practice. Assigning residents as observers in simulation training and involving them in debriefing is still beneficial.

Purpose: In July 2015, the University of Ottawa introduced a competency-based medical education (CBME) postgraduate program for anesthesia. Prior to program implementation, this study aimed to identify Canadian anesthesiology program directors perceptions of CBME and residents’ opinion on how the program should be designed and perceived consequences of CBME. Methods: This two-phase, qualitative study included semi-structured interviews with Canadian anesthesia program directors (Phase I) and a focus group interview with residents enrolled in the University of Ottawa time-based anesthesia program (Phase II). Both phases sought to gauge participant’s perceptions of CBME. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed. Results: Data was combined to protect anonymity of the six participants (three program directors and three residents). Participants spoke about the perceived advantages of CBME, the need to establish definitions, and challenges to a CBME program highlighting logistical factors, implications for trainees and the role assessment plays in CBME. Conclusion: These findings will inform CBME implementation strategies in anesthesia programs across the country, and may assist other residency programs in the design of their programs. Furthermore, our findings may help identify potential challenges and issues that other postgraduate specialties may face as they transition to a CBME model.

Objective We investigated the inter-rater reliability of Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus when calculating the h-index of 25 senior scientists in the Clinical Epidemiology Program of the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. Materials and methods Bibliometric information and the h-indices for the subjects were computed by four raters using the automatic calculators in WoS and Scopus. Correlation and agreement between ratings was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient and a Bland–Altman plot, respectively. Results Data could not be gathered from Google Scholar due to feasibility constraints. The Spearman's rank correlation between the h-index of scientists calculated with WoS was 0.81 (95% CI 0.72–0.92) and with Scopus was 0.95 (95% CI 0.92–0.99). The Bland–Altman plot showed no significant rater bias in WoS and Scopus; however, the agreement between ratings is higher in Scopus compared to WoS. Conclusion Our results showed a stronger relationship and increased agreement between raters when calculating the h-index of a scientist using Scopus compared to WoS. The higher inter-rater reliability and simple user interface used in Scopus may render it the more effective database when calculating the h-index of senior scientists in epidemiology.

Aims To systematically evaluate the literature on interventions that improve skills retention following advanced structured resuscitation training programs designed for healthcare professionals. Methods A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, and Scopus was performed. Only randomized controlled trials investigating skills retention following advanced structured resuscitation training programs for healthcare professionals between inception to November 21, 2018 were included. Publications that assessed only knowledge acquisition were excluded. Relevant data from included studies were extracted and study quality was critically appraised, both independently and in duplicate by multiple reviewers. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). Due to significant clinical heterogeneity in SRT training, study designs and interventions, a qualitative synthesis was used to summarize findings. Main results Sixteen studies, with a combined total of 1192 participants, were included in the final analysis. The majority of studies were conducted in North America and involved trainees or novice learners. ACLS was the most extensively studied, followed by NRP, ALS, and ATLS. Skills retention at 6 months was the most commonly used primary endpoint assessed using a simulated resuscitation checklist with either an adopted or created assessment tool. Most studies demonstrated a positive impact on skills retention when an interactive intervention or simulation was used. However, merely having a high-fidelity mannequin alone for simulation was found to have minimal effect on skills retention in the absence of other changes in content delivery. Booster sessions were found to be minimally effective in reinforcing long-term skills retention; however, most studies examining this intervention had small sample sizes and were underpowered. Conclusions Simulation-based interventions, refresher courses and adjustments to the content delivery of advanced structured resuscitation training courses were found to have the greatest impact on skills retention. However, due to significant heterogeneity and methodological flaws in the available studies, no definitive conclusions can be made regarding other interventions. Overall, there is a paucity of skills retention research and further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal intervention and design for resuscitation training that would maximize skills retention.

Interprofessional simulation-based education is effective for learning non-technical critical care skills and strengthening interprofessional team collaboration to optimize quality of care and patient outcome. Implementation of interprofessional simulation sessions in initial and continuing education is facilitated by a team of "champions" from each discipline/profession to ensure educational quality and logistics. Interprofessional simulation training must be integrated into a broader interprofessional curriculum supported by managers, administrators and clinical colleagues from different professional programs. When conducting interprofessional simulation training, it is essential to account for sociological factors (hierarchy, power, authority, interprofessional conflicts, gender, access to information, professional identity) both in scenario design and debriefing. Teamwork assessment tools in interprofessional simulation training may be used to guide debriefing. The interprofessional simulation setting (in-situ or simulation centre) will be chosen according to the learning objectives and the logistics.

Background Non-technical skills, such as communication or leadership, are integral to clinical competence in anaesthesia. There is a need for valid and reliable tools to measure anaesthetists' non-technical performance for both initial and continuing professional development. This systematic review aims to summarise the measurement properties of existing assessment tools to determine which tool is most robust. Methods Embase (via OVID), Medline and Medline in Process (via OVID), and reference lists of included studies and previously published relevant systematic reviews were searched (through August 2017). Quantitative studies investigating the measurement properties of tools used to assess anaesthetists' intraoperative non-technical skills, either in a clinical or simulated environment, were included. Pairs of independent reviewers determined eligibility and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Results The search yielded 978 studies, of which 14 studies describing seven tools met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 12 involved simulated crisis settings only. The measurement properties of the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills (ANTS) tool were most commonly assessed (n=9 studies), with studies of two types of validity (content, concurrent) and two types of reliability (internal consistency, interrater). Most of these studies, however, were at serious risk of bias. Conclusions Though there are seven tools for assessing the non-technical skills of anaesthetists, only ANTS has been extensively investigated with regard to its measurement properties. ANTS appears to have acceptable validity and reliability for assessing non-technical skills of anaesthetists in both simulated and clinical settings. Future research should consider additional clinical contexts and types of measurement properties.

BackgroundEducational interventions to improve teamwork in crisis situations have proliferated in recent years with substantial variation in teamwork measurement. This systematic review aimed to synthesise available tools and their measurement properties in order to identify the most robust tool for measuring the teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations.MethodsSearches were conducted in Embase (via OVID), PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Education Resources Information Center, Medline and Medline In-Process (via OVID) (through 12 January 2017). Studies evaluating the measurement properties of teamwork assessment tools for teams in clinical or simulated crisis situations were included. Two independent reviewers screened studies based on predetermined criteria and completed data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.ResultsThe search yielded 1822 references. Twenty studies were included, representing 13 assessment tools. Tools were primarily assessed in simulated resuscitation scenarios for emergency department teams. The Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) had the most validation studies (n=5), which demonstrated three sources of validity (content, construct and concurrent) and three sources of reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater reliability and test–retest reliability). Most studies of TEAM’s measurement properties were at no risk of bias.ConclusionsA number of tools are available for assessing teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations. Although selection will ultimately depend on the user’s context, TEAM may be the most promising tool given its measurement evidence. Currently, there is a lack of tools to assess teamwork performance during intraoperative crisis situations. Additional research is needed in this regard.

IntroductionThe proportion of older acute care physicians (ACPs) has been steadily increasing. Ageing is associated with physiological changes and prospective research investigating how such age-related physiological changes affect clinical performance, including crisis resource management (CRM) skills, is lacking. There is a gap in the literature on whether physician’s age influences baseline CRM performance and also learning from simulation. We aim to investigate whether ageing is associated with baseline CRM skills of ACPs (emergency, critical care and anaesthesia) using simulated crisis scenarios and to assess whether ageing influences learning from simulation-based education.Methods and analysisThis is a prospective cohort multicentre study recruiting ACPs from the Universities of Toronto and Ottawa, Canada. Each participant will manage an advanced cardiovascular life support crisis-simulated scenario (pretest) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills. They will then manage another simulated crisis scenario (immediate post-test). Three months after, participants will return to manage a third simulated crisis scenario (retention post-test). The relationship between biological age and chronological age will be assessed by measuring the participants CRM skills and their ability to learn from high-fidelity simulation.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre Research Ethics Board (REB Number 140–2015) and the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board (#20150173–01H). The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and at scientific meetings.Trial registration numberNCT02683447.

We have witnessed an ongoing increase in the publication of evaluation work aimed at measuring the processes and outcomes related to a range of interprofessional education (IPE) activities and initiatives. Systematic reviews of IPE have, however, suggested that while the quality of evaluation studies is improving, there continues to be a number of empirical weaknesses with this work. In an effort to enhance the quality of IPE evaluation studies, this guide provides a series of ideas and suggestions about how to undertake a robust evaluation of an IPE event. The guide presents a series of key lessons for colleagues to help them undertake a good quality IPE evaluation, covering a range of methodological, practical and ethical issues. These include: the formation of evaluation questions, use of evaluation models and theoretical perspectives, advice about the selection of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods evaluation designs, managing evaluation resources, and ideas about disseminating evaluation results to the broader IPE community. It is anticipated that this guide will assist IPE colleagues in undertaking high-quality evaluation in order to provide valuable evidence for different stakeholders, and also help inform the scholarly knowledge for the interprofessional field.

BACKGROUND To evaluate the relative research productivity and ranking of anesthesiology departments in Canada and the United States, using the Hirsch index (h-index) and 4 other previously validated metrics. METHODS We identified 150 anesthesiology departments in Canada and the United States with an accredited residency program. Publications for each of the 150 departments were identified using Thomson's Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science, and the citation report for each department was exported. The bibliometric data were used to calculate publication metrics for 3 time periods: cumulative (1945-2014), 10 years (2005-2014), and 5 years (2010-2014). The following group metrics were then used to determine the publication impact and relative ranking of all 150 departments: h-index, m-index, total number of publications, sum of citations, and average number of citations per article. Ranking for each metric were also stratified by using a proxy for departmental size. The most common journals in which US and Canadian anesthesiology departments publish their work were identified. RESULTS The majority (23 of the top 25) of top-ranked anesthesiology departments are in the United States, and 2 of the top 25 departments (University of Toronto; McGill University) are in Canada. There was a strong positive relationship between each of h-index, total number of publications, and the sum of citations (0.91-0.97; P < .0001). Departmental size correlates with increased academic productivity on most metrics. The most frequent journals in which US and Canadian anesthesiology departments publish are Anesthesiology, Anesthesia and Analgesia, and the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS Our study ranked the Canadian and US anesthesiology departmental research productivity using the h-index applied to each department, total number of publications, total number of citations, and average number of citations. The strong relationship between the h-index and both the number of publications and number of citations of anesthesiology departments shows that the departments with the highest number of publications are also producing research with the most highly cited articles (ie, most impact), as demonstrated by the h-index.

Evidence has demonstrated that the use of dynamic ultrasound guidance (USG) for central venous catheter (CVC) significantly decreases attempts, failures, and complication rates. Despite national organizations recommending the use of USG and its increasing availability, USG is used inconsistently and non-uniformly. We sought to determine if an online training module for CVC insertion with ultrasound guidance will improve acquisition and long-term retention of knowledge and skills for attending physicians. Participants were tested for declarative knowledge and skills on a simulator (pre-test) for ultrasound-guided CVC insertion at baseline. They then completed an online learning module followed by an immediate post-test and a six-month retention test. There were 16 attending physicians who participated in the study. The CVC training module increased declarative knowledge acquisition and retention. No significant difference in simulated CVC performance was found over the three time points.

To compare the effectiveness of a mastery learning (ML) versus a time-based (TB) BLS course for the acquisition and retention of BLS knowledge and skills in laypeople.After ethics approval, laypeople were randomized to a ML or TB BLS course based on the American Heart Association (AHA) Heartsaver course. In the ML group, subjects practiced and received feedback at six BLS stations until they reached a pre-determined level of performance. The TB group received a standard AHA six-station BLS course. All participants took the standard in-course BLS skills test at the end of their course. BLS skills and knowledge were tested using a high-fidelity scenario and knowledge questionnaire upon course completion (immediate post-test) and after four months (retention test). Video recorded scenarios were assessed by two blinded, independent raters using the AHA skills checklist.Forty-three subjects were included in analysis (23ML;20TB). For primary outcome, subjects' performance did not change after four months, regardless of the teaching modality (TB from (median[IQR]) 8.0[6.125;8.375] to 8.5[5.625;9.0] vs. ML from 8.0[7.0;9.0] to 7.0[6.0;8.0], p = 0.12 for test phase, p = 0.21 for interaction between effect of teaching modality and test phase). For secondary outcomes, subjects acquired knowledge between pre- and immediate post-tests (p0.005), and partially retained the acquired knowledge up to four months (p0.005) despite a decrease between immediate post-test and retention test (p = 0.009), irrespectively of the group (p = 0.59) (TB from 63.3[48.3;73.3] to 93.3[81.7;100.0] and then 93.3[81.7;93.3] vs. ML from 60.0[46.7;66.7] to 93.3[80.0;100.0] and then 80.0[73.3;93.3]). Regardless of the group after 4 months, chest compression depth improved (TB from 39.0[35.0;46.0] to 48.5[40.25;58.0] vs. ML from 40.0[37.0;47.0] to 45.0[37.0;52.0]; p = 0.012), but not the rate (TB from 118.0[114.0;125.0] to 120.5[113.0;129.5] vs. ML from 119.0[113.0;130.0] to 123.0[102.0;132.0]; p = 0.70). All subjects passed the in-course BLS skills test. Pass/fail rates were poor in both groups at both the simulated immediate post-test (ML = 1/22;TB = 0/20; p = 0.35) and retention test (ML pass/fail = 1/22, TB pass/fail = 0/20; p = 0.35). The ML course was slightly longer than the TB course (108[94;117] min vs. 95[89;102] min; p = 0.003).There was no major benefit of a ML compared to a TB BLS course for the acquisition and four-month retention of knowledge or skills among laypeople.

Partnerships for postgraduate medical education between institutions in high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries are increasingly common models that can create capacity in human resources for health. Nevertheless, data are currently limited to guide the development of this kind of educational program. We conducted semi-structured interviews with visiting and local faculty members in the externally supported University of Zambia Master of Medicine Anesthesia Program. Interviews were thematically analyzed with qualitative methodology. Respondents spoke of differences in clinical practice, including resource limitations, organizational issues, presentation and comorbidities of patients, surgical techniques, and cultural issues relating to communication and teamwork. A key theme was communication amongst distributed visiting faculty. Infrequent face-to-face meetings jeopardized programmatic learning and the consistency of teaching and assessment. Co-learning was considered central to the development of a new program, as visiting faculty had to adapt to local challenges while establishing themselves as visiting experts. An ongoing challenge for faculty was determining when to adapt to the local context to facilitate patient care and when to insist on familiar standards of practice in order to advocate for patient safety. As a new and evolving program, the findings from this study highlight challenges and opportunities for faculty as part of a partnership for postgraduate medical education. Since maintaining an effective faculty is essential to ensure the sustainability of any teaching program, this work may help other similar programs to anticipate and overcome potential challenges.

Simulation-based education allows experiential learning without risk to patients. Interprofessional education aims to provide opportunities to different professions for learning how to work effectively together. Interprofessional simulation-based education presents many challenges, including the logistics of setting up the session and providing effective feedback to participants with different backgrounds and mental models. This paper aims to provide educators with a series of practical and pedagogical tips for designing, implementing, assessing, and evaluating a successful interprofessional team-based simulation session. The paper is organized in the sequence that an educator might use in developing an interprofessional simulation-based education session. Collectively, this paper provides guidance from determining interprofessional learning objectives and curricular design to program evaluation. With a better understanding of the concepts and pedagogical methods underlying interprofessional education and simulation, educators will be able to create conditions for a unique educational experience where individuals learn with and from other specialties and professions in a controlled, safe environment.

Purpose To address an aging anesthesia workforce, we review the relevant changes and implications associated with age in order to stimulate discussion at the individual, local, and national levels regarding appropriate changes in practice aimed at protecting patient safety. Principal findings In a 2013 survey of Canadian Anesthesiologists, 22% were aged 55-64 yr, 7% were aged 65-74 yr, and 3% were older than 74 yr. Clinical abilities decline with age, making older anesthesiologists more likely than their younger colleagues to be associated with adverse patient events. Anesthesiologists older than 65 yr in Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia had 50% more cases involving litigation and almost twice the number of cases involving severe patient injury compared with anesthesiologists younger than 51 yr of age. In the absence of overt deterioration in skills, decisions about reducing activities and retirement are left largely to individuals despite their limited ability to self-assess competence. This state of affairs may contribute to the increased incidence of adverse events and poor patient outcomes. Conclusions Provincial regulatory bodies have peer assessment programs to evaluate physicians at random, following a complaint, and at certain ages, but all have limitations. Simulation has been used widely for training and assessment in the aviation industry as well as in automobile driving exams. Simulation can assess crisis recognition and management, which is crucial in anesthesiology and not well assessed by other methods, and could assist elderly anesthesiologists during the pre-retirement phase of their careers. A standardized schedule for winding down would have advantages for physicians, their department, and their patients. A suggested schedule might include no further on-call duties for those aged 60 yr and older, no further high-acuity cases for those aged 65 yr and older, and retirement from operating room (OR) clinical practice (with possible continuation of non-OR clinical or other non-clinical activities, if desired) at age 70 yr. These timelines could be extended with satisfactory performance in annual simulation sessions involving assessment and practice in crisis management.