Unanticipated difficult airway in obstetric patients: development of a new algorithm for formative assessment in high-fidelity simulation.
(66/98)
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to develop a consensus-based algorithm for the management of the unanticipated difficult airway in obstetrics, and to use this algorithm for the assessment of anesthesia residents' performance during high-fidelity simulation. METHODS: An algorithm for unanticipated difficult airway in obstetrics, outlining the management of six generic clinical situations of "can and cannot ventilate" possibilities in three clinical contexts: elective cesarean section, emergency cesarean section for fetal distress, and emergency cesarean section for maternal distress, was used to create a critical skills checklist. The authors used four of these scenarios for high-fidelity simulation for residents. Their critical and crisis resource management skills were assessed independently by three raters using their checklist and the Ottawa Global rating scale. RESULTS: Sixteen residents participated. The checklist scores ranged from 64-80% and improved from scenario 1 to 4. Overall Global rating scale scores were marginal and not significantly different between scenarios. The intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.58, 0.78) represents a good interrater reliability for the checklist. Multiple critical errors were identified, the most common being not calling for help or a difficult airway cart. CONCLUSIONS: Aside from identifying common critical errors, the authors noted that the residents' performance was poorest in two of our scenarios: "fetal distress and cannot intubate, cannot ventilate" and "maternal distress and cannot intubate, but can ventilate." More teaching emphasis may be warranted to avoid commonly identified critical errors and to improve overall management. Our study also suggests a potential for experiential learning with successive simulations. (+info)
A systematic literature review on first aid provided by laypeople to trauma victims.
(67/98)
Tools used to assess medical students competence in procedural skills at the end of a primary medical degree: a systematic review.
(69/98)
The objective was to systematically review the literature to identify and grade tools used for the end point assessment of procedural skills (e.g., phlebotomy, IV cannulation, suturing) competence in medical students prior to certification. The authors searched eight bibliographic databases electronically - ERIC, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Psychinfo, PsychLIT, EBM Reviews and the Cochrane databases. Two reviewers independently reviewed the literature to identify procedural assessment tools used specifically for assessing medical students within the PRISMA framework, the inclusion/exclusion criteria and search period. Papers on OSATS and DOPS were excluded as they focused on post-registration assessment and clinical rather than simulated competence. Of 659 abstracted articles 56 identified procedural assessment tools. Only 11 specifically assessed medical students. The final 11 studies consisted of 1 randomised controlled trial, 4 comparative and 6 descriptive studies yielding 12 heterogeneous procedural assessment tools for analysis. Seven tools addressed four discrete pre-certification skills, basic suture (3), airway management (2), nasogastric tube insertion (1) and intravenous cannulation (1). One tool used a generic assessment of procedural skills. Two tools focused on postgraduate laparoscopic skills and one on osteopathic students and thus were not included in this review. The levels of evidence are low with regard to reliability - kappa = 0.65-0.71 and minimum validity is achieved - face and content. In conclusion, there are no tools designed specifically to assess competence of procedural skills in a final certification examination. There is a need to develop standardised tools with proven reliability and validity for assessment of procedural skills competence at the end of medical training. Medicine graduates must have comparable levels of procedural skills acquisition entering the clinical workforce irrespective of the country of training. (+info)
Failed tracheal intubation in obstetric anaesthesia: 2 yr national case-control study in the UK.
(70/98)
Access to difficult airway equipment and training for rural GP-anaesthetists in Australia: results of a 2012 survey.
(71/98)
INTRODUCTION: In rural Australia, general practitioners (GPs) form the frontline for provision of medical services. Besides responsibilities for primary care via private practice, rural doctors often provide emergency and inpatient services for rural hospitals. The aim of this study was to determine access to difficult airway equipment and training among the GP-anaesthetist cadre in rural Australia. METHODS: DESIGN: an online survey regarding availability of difficult airway equipment, access to ongoing training and inviting comments on rural anaesthesia in general. SETTING: a questionnaire was distributed to rural doctors in January 2012 via membership databases of the Rural Doctors Association of Australia and state-based Rural Doctor Workforce Agencies. PARTICIPANTS: 293 participants identified as a GP-anaesthetist working in rural Australia (65% response rate). Of these 83% were male, 17% female with the percentage of respondents from each state concordant with the distributions indicated by the 2010 Rural Health Workforce National Minimum Dataset. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: closed-ended questions were quantified and open-ended questions analysed to determine issues relevant to GP-anaesthetists. RESULTS: Only 53% of GP-anaesthetists reported access to a difficult airway trolley or box in their facility. Lack of availability of certain airway equipment was reported among GP-anaesthetists, with very few having access to advanced intubation aids such as videolaryngoscopes or fibreoptic devices (flexible fibrescopes and/or malleable fibreoptic stylets). Open-ended questions suggested that GP-anaesthetists desired such aids to manage difficult airways. Only 79% had access to surgical airway or paediatric airway equipment. Of the respondents, 58% reported involvement in prehospital medicine but only 12% had received training in this challenging environment. A formal arrangement for prehospital responses existed for only 7% of respondents. CONCLUSION: Despite the existence of well-publicised algorithms for difficult airway management and the need for specific equipment to manage the difficult airway, Australian GP-anaesthetists report difficulty accessing essential equipment for these infrequent but life-threatening events. This is surprising in the light of recommendations from the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists. The consequences of difficulty in airway management can be catastrophic. Equipment needs must be balanced against important considerations including ease of use, initial and ongoing training, and cost. Suggestions for affordable equipment and ongoing training for rural GP-anaesthetists are made. The involvement of GP-anaesthetists in prehospital responses occurs in the absence of formal arrangements and with a dearth of training. There is scope to improve rural prehospital responses in Australia, utilising the advanced skills of GP-anaesthetists in resuscitation and airway management. (+info)
Lung ultrasound-guided management of acute breathlessness during pregnancy.
(72/98)