The Sepsis Six tool: what it is and how to assess a deteriorating patient

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 8-10
Author(s):  
Erin Dean
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.


2021 ◽  
pp. 103093
Author(s):  
Mina Azimirad ◽  
Carin Magnusson ◽  
Allison Wiseman ◽  
Tuomas Selander ◽  
Ilkka Parviainen ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 433-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael McGillion ◽  
Adam Dubrowski ◽  
Robyn Stremler ◽  
Judy Watt-Watson ◽  
Fiona Campbell ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pain-related misbeliefs among health care professionals (HCPs) are common and contribute to ineffective postoperative pain assessment. While standardized patients (SPs) have been effectively used to improve HCPs’ assessment skills, not all centres have SP programs. The present equivalence randomized controlled pilot trial examined the efficacy of an alternative simulation method – deteriorating patient-based simulation (DPS) – versus SPs for improving HCPs’ pain knowledge and assessment skills.METHODS: Seventy-two HCPs were randomly assigned to a 3 h SP or DPS simulation intervention. Measures were recorded at baseline, immediate postintervention and two months postintervention. The primary outcome was HCPs’ pain assessment performance as measured by the postoperative Pain Assessment Skills Tool (PAST). Secondary outcomes included HCPs knowledge of pain-related misbeliefs, and perceived satisfaction and quality of the simulation. These outcomes were measured by the Pain Beliefs Scale (PBS), the Satisfaction with Simulated Learning Scale (SSLS) and the Simulation Design Scale (SDS), respectively. Student’sttests were used to test for overall group differences in postintervention PAST, SSLS and SDS scores. One-way analysis of covariance tested for overall group differences in PBS scores.RESULTS: DPS and SP groups did not differ on post-test PAST, SSLS or SDS scores. Knowledge of pain-related misbeliefs was also similar between groups.CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest that DPS is an effective simulation alternative for HCPs’ education on postoperative pain assessment, with improvements in performance and knowledge comparable with SP-based simulation. An equivalence trial to examine the effectiveness of deteriorating patient-based simulation versus standardized patients is warranted.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Singleton ◽  
Janet James ◽  
Simone Penfold ◽  
Liz Falconer ◽  
Jacqueline Priego-Hernandez ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 195-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fenella J. Gill ◽  
Gavin D. Leslie ◽  
Andrea P. Marshall

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document