Effect of pediatric advanced life support course on pediatric residents' intubation success

2011 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanıl Kendirli ◽  
Aysun Çaltık ◽  
Murat Duman ◽  
Hayri Levent Yılmaz ◽  
Dinçer Yıldızdaş ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 2333794X1987680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sule Doymaz ◽  
Munaza Rizvi ◽  
Marguerite Orsi ◽  
Clara Giambruno

Objectives. We assessed pediatric residents’ retention of knowledge and clinical skills according to the time since their last American Heart Association Pediatric Advanced Life Support (AHA PALS) certification. Methods. Sixty-four pediatric residents were recruited and divided into 3 groups based on the time since their last PALS certification, as follows: group 1, 0 to 8 months; group 2, 9 to 16 months, and group 3, 17 to 24 months. Residents’ knowledge was tested using 10 multiple-choice AHA PALS pretest questions and their clinical skills performance was assessed with simulation mock code scenarios using 2 different AHA PALS checklists, and mean scores were calculated for the 3 groups. Differences in the test scores and overall clinical skill performances among the 3 groups were analyzed using analyses of variance, χ2 tests, and Jonckheere-Terpstra tests. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. Results. The pediatric residents’ mean overall clinical skills performance scores declined within the first 8 months after their last AHA PALS certification date and continued to decrease over time (87%, 82.6%, and 77.4% for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; P = .048). Residents’ multiple-choice test scores declined in all 3 groups, but the scores were not significantly different. Conclusions. Residents’ clinical skills performance declined within the first 8 months after PALS certification and continued to decline as the time from the last certification increased. Using mock code simulations and reinforcing AHA PALS guidelines during pediatric residency deserve further evaluation.


2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 341-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Merlin ◽  
Huma Safdar ◽  
Susan Calabrese ◽  
Alex Lewinsky ◽  
Joseph Manfre ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective:A rapid sequence intubation (RSI) method was introduced to a university-based emergency medical services (EMS) system. This is a report of the initial experience with the first 50 patients in a unique, two-tiered, two-advanced life support (ALS) providers system.Methods:The data were evaluated prospectively after an extensive RSI training period, consisting of didactic information and skills performance. Fifty consecutive patient records that documented the procedure were abstracted. Data abstracted included end-tidal CO2, heart rate, blood pressure, and pulse oximetry at various time intervals. Intubation success rates and number of attempts were documented. The consistency of proper documentation also was noted on patient care records.Results:No differences were noted in heart rate prior to RSI and one and five minutes after the RSI procedure was begun. No differences in blood pressure at one and five minutes were noted. Statistically significant improvements were found in pulse oximetry comparing prior to RSI and one minute after (p < 0.001; 95% CI = 3.15–11.41) as well as prior to RSI and five minutes after RSI was started (p < 0.0002; 95% CI = 4.60–13.33). No differences were observed in end-tidal CO2 at one and five minutes. Overall intubation success rate was 96%, with 82% on first attempt and 92% on two or less attempts. Documentation for individual vitals was consistently <75%.Conclusions:Patients had no significant worsening of vital signs during the RSI procedure and mild improvement in pulse oximetry. Intubation success rates were consistent with national averages. Proper documentation was lacking in more than one quarter of the charts. These data add to a body of literature that raises further concerns regarding prehospital RSI.


Circulation ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 92 (7) ◽  
pp. 2006-2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arno Zaritsky ◽  
Vinay Nadkarni ◽  
Mary Fran Hazinski ◽  
George Foltin ◽  
Linda Quan ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Catherine M. Groden ◽  
Erwin T. Cabacungan ◽  
Ruby Gupta

Objective The authors aim to compare all code blue events, regardless of the need for chest compressions, in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) versus the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). We hypothesize that code events in the two units differ, reflecting different disease processes. Study Design This is a retrospective analysis of 107 code events using the code narrator, which is an electronic medical record of real-time code documentation, from April 2018 to March 2019. Events were divided into two groups, NICU and PICU. Neonatal resuscitation program algorithm was used for NICU events and a pediatric advanced life-support algorithm was used for PICU events. Events and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The Mann–Whitney test and linear regressions were done to compare the total code duration, time from the start of code to airway insertion, and time from airway insertion to end of code event. Results In the PICU, there were almost four times more code blue events per month and more likely to involve patients with seizures and no chronic condition. NICU events more often involved ventilated patients and those under 2 months of age. The median code duration for NICU events was 2.5 times shorter than for PICU events (11.5 vs. 29 minutes), even when adjusted for patient characteristics. Survival to discharge was not different in the two groups. Conclusion Our study suggests that NICU code events as compared with PICU code events are more likely to be driven by airway problems, involve patients <2 months of age, and resolve quickly once airway is taken care of. This supports the use of a ventilation-focused neonatal resuscitation program for patients in the NICU. Key Points


Author(s):  
Jasmeet Soar ◽  
Bernd W. Böttiger ◽  
Pierre Carli ◽  
Keith Couper ◽  
Charles D. Deakin ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Lorenzo Gamberini ◽  
Cosimo Picoco ◽  
Donatella Del Giudice ◽  
Corrado Zenesini ◽  
Marco Tartaglione ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Importance: The dispatch of Advanced Life Support (ALS) teams in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is still a hardly studied aspect of prehospital emergency logistics. In 2015, the dispatch algorithm of Emilia Est Emergency Operation Centre (EE-EOC) was implemented and the dispatch of ALS teams was changed from primary to secondary based on triage of dispatched vehicles for high-priority interventions when teams with Immediate Life Support (ILS) skills were dispatched. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effects on the appropriateness of ALS teams’ intervention and their employment time, and to compare sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm implementation. Design: This was a retrospective before-after observational study. Settings and Participants: Primary dispatches managed by EE-EOC involving ambulances and/or ALS teams were included. Two groups were created on the basis of the years of intervention (2013-2014 versus 2017-2018). Intervention: A switch from primary to secondary dispatch of ALS teams in case of high-priority dispatches managed by ILS teams was implemented. Outcomes: Appropriateness of ALS team intervention, total task time of ALS vehicles, and sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm were reviewed. Results: The study included 242,501 emergency calls that generated 56,567 red code dispatches. The new algorithm significantly increased global sensitivity and specificity of the system in terms of recognition of potential need of ALS intervention and the specificity of primary ALS dispatch. The appropriateness of ALS intervention was significantly increased; total tasking time per day for ALS and the number of critical dispatches without ALS available were reduced. Conclusion: The revision of the dispatch criteria and the extension of the two-tiered dispatch for ALS teams significantly increased the appropriateness of ALS intervention and reduced both the global tasking time and the number of high-priority dispatches without ALS teams available.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document