In-situ simulation

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.

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. e028572
Author(s):  
Amy Halls ◽  
Mohan Kanagasundaram ◽  
Margaret Lau-Walker ◽  
Hilary Diack ◽  
Simon Bettles

ObjectiveAcutely unwell patients in the primary care setting are uncommon, but their successful management requires involvement from staff (clinical and non-clinical) working as a cohesive team. Despite the advantages of interprofessional education being well documented, there is little research evidence of this within primary care. Enhancing interprofessional working could ultimately improve care of the acutely ill patient. This proof of concept study aimed to develop an in situ simulation of a medical emergency to use within primary care, and assess its acceptability and utility through participants’ reported experiences.SettingThree research-active General Practices in south east England. Nine staff members per practice consented to participate, representing clinical and non-clinical professions.MethodsThe intervention of an in situ simulation scenario of a cardiac arrest was developed by the research team. For the evaluation, staff participated in individual qualitative semistructured interviews following the in situ simulation: these focused on their experiences of participating, with particular attention on interdisciplinary training and potential future developments of the in situ simulation.ResultsThe in situ simulation was appropriate for use within the participating General Practices. Qualitative thematic analysis of the interviews identified four themes: (1) apprehension and (un)willing participation, (2) reflection on the simulation design, (3) experiences of the scenario and (4) training.ConclusionsThis study suggests in situ simulation can be an acceptable approach for interdisciplinary team training within primary care, being well-received by practices and staff. This contributes to a fuller understanding of how in situ simulation can benefit both workforce and patients. Future research is needed to further refine the in situ simulation training session.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jette Led Sørensen ◽  
Doris Østergaard ◽  
Vicki LeBlanc ◽  
Bent Ottesen ◽  
Lars Konge ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. s146-s147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tareq El Menabawey ◽  
Valerie Dimmock ◽  
Sundas Hasan ◽  
Sini John ◽  
Sam Murray ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp20X711425
Author(s):  
Joanna Lawrence ◽  
Petronelle Eastwick-Field ◽  
Anne Maloney ◽  
Helen Higham

BackgroundGP practices have limited access to medical emergency training and basic life support is often taught out of context as a skills-based event.AimTo develop and evaluate a whole team integrated simulation-based education, to enhance learning, change behaviours and provide safer care.MethodPhase 1: 10 practices piloted a 3-hour programme delivering 40 minutes BLS and AED skills and 2-hour deteriorating patient simulation. Three scenarios where developed: adult chest pain, child anaphylaxis and baby bronchiolitis. An adult simulation patient and relative were used and a child and baby manikin. Two facilitators trained in coaching and debriefing used the 3D debriefing model. Phase 2: 12 new practices undertook identical training derived from Phase 1, with pre- and post-course questionnaires. Teams were scored on: team working, communication, early recognition and systematic approach. The team developed action plans derived from their learning to inform future response. Ten of the 12 practices from Phase 2 received an emergency drill within 6 months of the original session. Three to four members of the whole team integrated training, attended the drill, but were unaware of the nature of the scenario before. Scoring was repeated and action plans were revisited to determine behaviour changes.ResultsEvery emergency drill demonstrated improved scoring in skills and behaviour.ConclusionA combination of: in situ GP simulation, appropriately qualified facilitators in simulation and debriefing, and action plans developed by the whole team suggests safer care for patients experiencing a medical emergency.


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. e16-e16
Author(s):  
Ahmed Moussa ◽  
Audrey Larone-Juneau ◽  
Laura Fazilleau ◽  
Marie-Eve Rochon ◽  
Justine Giroux ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Transitions to new healthcare environments can negatively impact patient care and threaten patient safety. Immersive in situ simulation conducted in newly constructed single family room (SFR) Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) prior to occupancy, has been shown to be effective in testing new environments and identifying latent safety threats (LSTs). These simulations overlay human factors to identify LSTs as new and existing process and systems are implemented in the new environment OBJECTIVES We aimed to demonstrate that large-scale, immersive, in situ simulation prior to the transition to a new SFR NICU improves: 1) systems readiness, 2) staff preparedness, 3) patient safety, 4) staff comfort with simulation, and 5) staff attitude towards culture change. DESIGN/METHODS Multidisciplinary teams of neonatal healthcare providers (HCP) and parents of former NICU patients participated in large-scale, immersive in-situ simulations conducted in the new NICU prior to occupancy. One eighth of the NICU was outfitted with equipment and mannequins and staff performed in their native roles. Multidisciplinary debriefings, which included parents, were conducted immediately after simulations to identify LSTs. Through an iterative process issues were resolved and additional simulations conducted. Debriefings were documented and debriefing transcripts transcribed and LSTs classified using qualitative methods. To assess systems readiness and staff preparedness for transition into the new NICU, HCPs completed surveys prior to transition, post-simulation and post-transition. Systems readiness and staff preparedness were rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Average survey responses were analyzed using dependent samples t-tests and repeated measures ANOVAs. RESULTS One hundred eight HCPs and 24 parents participated in six half-day simulation sessions. A total of 75 LSTs were identified and were categorized into eight themes: 1) work organization, 2) orientation and parent wayfinding, 3) communication devices/systems, 4) nursing and resuscitation equipment, 5) ergonomics, 6) parent comfort; 7) work processes, and 8) interdepartmental interactions. Prior to the transition to the new NICU, 76% of the LSTs were resolved. Survey response rate was 31%, 16%, 7% for baseline, post-simulation and post-move surveys, respectively. System readiness at baseline was 1.3/5,. Post-simulation systems readiness was 3.5/5 (p = 0.0001) and post-transition was 3.9/5 (p = 0.02). Staff preparedness at baseline was 1.4/5. Staff preparedness post-simulation was 3.3/5 (p = 0.006) and post-transition was 3.9/5 (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION Large-scale, immersive in situ simulation is a feasible and effective methodology for identifying LSTs, improving systems readiness and staff preparedness in a new SFR NICU prior to occupancy. However, to optimize patient safety, identified LSTs must be mitigated prior to occupancy. Coordinating large-scale simulations is worth the time and cost investment necessary to optimize systems and ensure patient safety prior to transition to a new SFR NICU.


2008 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 223-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan D. Baxter ◽  
Pierre Cardinal ◽  
Jonathan Hooper ◽  
Rakesh Patel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document