scholarly journals Trauma teams and time to early management during in situ trauma team training

BMJ Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e009911 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Härgestam ◽  
Marie Lindkvist ◽  
Maritha Jacobsson ◽  
Christine Brulin ◽  
Magnus Hultin
BMJ Open ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (10) ◽  
pp. e003525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Härgestam ◽  
Marie Lindkvist ◽  
Christine Brulin ◽  
Maritha Jacobsson ◽  
Magnus Hultin

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judi Galea ◽  
Rosel Tallach ◽  
Sarah Turle ◽  
Anil Joshi

2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Rosqvist ◽  
S. Lauritsalo ◽  
J. Paloneva

Background and Aims: As conducting the regular trauma team simulation training is expensive and time-consuming, its effects must be explored. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of a structured 2-h in situ multiprofessional trauma team simulation training course on non-technical skills. Materials and Methods: This prospective study comprised 90 trauma teams with 430 participants. The structured, 2-h course consisted of an introductory lecture and two different simulations with debriefings. Data were collected using a pre–post self-assessment questionnaire. In addition, the expert raters used the T-NOTECHS scale. Results: The following non-technical skills improved significantly among both medical doctors and nurses: knowledge of the trauma resuscitation guidelines, problem identification, decision making, situation awareness/coping with stress, communication and interaction, time management, being under authority, and confidence in one’s role in a team. The teams improved significantly in leadership, cooperation and resource management, communication and interaction, assessment and decision making, and situation awareness/coping with stress. Conclusion: A short, structured 2-h in situ trauma team simulation training course is effective in improving non-technical skills.


CJEM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (S1) ◽  
pp. S78-S79 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Petrosoniak ◽  
A. Gray ◽  
M. Fan ◽  
K. White ◽  
M. McGowan ◽  
...  

Introduction: Resuscitation of a trauma patient requires a multidisciplinary team to perform in a dynamic, high-stakes environment. Error is ubiquitous in trauma care, often related to latent safety threats (LSTs) - previously unrecognized threats that can materialize at any time. In-situ simulation (ISS) allows a team to practice in their authentic environment while providing an opportunistic milieu to explore critical events and uncover LSTs that impact patient safety. Methods: At a Canadian Level 1 trauma centre, regular, unannounced trauma ISSs were conducted and video-recorded. A retrospective chart review of adverse events or unexpected deaths informed ISS scenario design. Each session began with a trauma team activation. The on-duty trauma team arrived in the trauma bay and provided care as they would for a real patient. Semi-structured debriefing with participant-driven LST identification and ethnographic observation occurred in real time. A framework analysis using video review was conducted by human factors experts to identify and evaluate LSTs. Feasibility was measured by the impact on ED workflow, interruptions of clinical care and participant feedback. Results: Six multidisciplinary, high-fidelity, ISS sessions were conducted and 70 multidisciplinary staff and trainees participated in at least one session. Using a framework analysis, LSTs were identified and categorized into seven themes that relate to clinical tasks, equipment, team communication, and participant workflow. LSTs were quantified and prioritized using a hazard scoring matrix. ISS was effectively implemented during both low and high patient volume situations. No critical interruptions in patient care were identified during ISS sessions and overall participant feedback was positive. Conclusion: This novel, multidisciplinary ISS trauma training program integrated risk-informed simulation cases with human factors analysis to identify LSTs. ISS offers an opportunity for an iterative review process of high-risk situations beyond the traditional morbidity and mortality rounds; rather than waiting for an actual case to generate discussion and review, we prophylactically examined critical situations and processes. Findings form a framework for recommendations about improvements in equipment, environment layout, workflow, system processes, effective team training, and ultimately patient safety.


Trauma ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 281-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Schofield ◽  
Emma Welfare ◽  
Simon Mercer

‘In-situ’ simulation or simulation ‘in the original place’ is gaining popularity as an educational modality. This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of performing simulation in the clinical workplace drawing on the authors’ experience, particularly for trauma teams and medical emergency teams. ‘In-situ’ simulation is a valuable tool for testing new guidelines and assessing for latent errors in the workplace.


2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence M. Gillman ◽  
Doug Martin ◽  
Paul T. Engels ◽  
Peter Brindley ◽  
Sandy Widder ◽  
...  

CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (S1) ◽  
pp. S90-S91
Author(s):  
N. Kester-Greene ◽  
L. Notario ◽  
H. Heipel ◽  
L. DaLuz ◽  
A. Nathens ◽  
...  

Innovation Concept: Effective communication for ad hoc teams is critical to successful management of multisystem trauma patients, to improve situational awareness and to mitigate risk of error. OBJECTIVES 1. Improve communication of ad hoc teams. 2. Identify system gaps. INNOVATION Team in situ simulations provide a unique opportunity to practice communication and assess systems in the real environment. Our trauma team consists of residents and staff from emergency services, general surgery, orthopedics, anaesthesia, nursing and respiratory therapy. Methods: A team of subject matter experts (SME's) from trauma, nursing, emergency medicine and simulation co-developed curriculum in response to a needs assessment that identified gaps in systems and team communication. The simulation occurred in the actual trauma bay. The on-call trauma team was paged and expected to manage a simulated multisystem trauma patient. Once the team arrived, they participated in a briefing, manikin-based simulation and a communication and system focused debriefing. Curriculum, Tool, or Material: Monthly scenarios consisted of management of a blunt trauma patient, emergency airway and massive hemorrhage protocol. Teams were assessed on communication skills and timeliness of interventions. Debriefing consisted of identification of system gaps and latent safety threats. Feedback was given by each discipline followed by SME's. Information was gathered from participant evaluations (5-point Likert scale and open ended questions) and group debrief. Feedback was themed and actions taken to co-create interventions to communication gaps and latent safety threats. As a result, cricothyroidotomy trays were standardized throughout the hospital to mitigate confusion, time delay and unfamiliarity during difficult airway interventions. Participants felt the exercise was an effective means of practicing interprofessional communication and role clarity, and improved their attitude towards the same. Conclusion: In situ simulation-based education with ad hoc trauma teams can improve interprofessional communication and identify latent safety threats for the management of multisystem trauma patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document