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 selfassessment 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.

BackgroundThe 5-item non-technical skills scale for trauma (T-NOTECHS) with five response categories is developed to assess non-technical skills in trauma team resuscitations. This validated instrument assesses behavioral aspects in teamwork. Outcome instruments should undergo a robust adaptation process followed by psychometric validation to maintain their measurement properties when translated into different languages. The translatability of the T-NOTECHS into a non-Anglo-Saxon language has not been thus far unraveled. The authors aimed to assess whether the T-NOTECHS would be translatable into a non-Anglo-Saxon language and to investigate its psychometric properties for simulated multi-professional trauma team resuscitations.MethodsThe T-NOTECHS (scores: 1 = poor; 5 = excellent) was translated and cross-culturally adapted into Finnish. Data was derived from 61 real hospital trauma team resuscitation simulations with 193 multi-professional participants. Floor-ceiling effects, internal consistency, and inter-rater reliability were analyzed. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to test construct validity.ResultsAfter pre-testing, minor changes were made to the Finnish translation of the T-NOTECHS. Mean scores of two raters were 3.76 and 4.01, respectively. The T-NOTECHS instrument showed no floor-effect either in single items or in the total score. The total score of the T-NOTECHS instrument showed a percentage of maximum scores of 1.6 and 4.9% by the Raters 1 and 2, respectively. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) was 0.70 with inter-item correlation of 0.54. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.54 and coefficient of repeatability 1.53. The T-NOTECHS loaded on one factor.ConclusionsThe T-NOTECHS translated well into a difficult non-Anglo-Saxon language. The rigorous adaptation process used here can be recommended in the translation of observational performance assessment instruments. The translated version demonstrated fair reliability and good construct validity for assessing team performance in simulated multi-professional trauma team resuscitations. The translated T-NOTECHS instrument can be used to assess the efficacy of simulated in-situ trauma team resuscitations allowing benchmarking and international collaboration.

ObjectivesThis study investigated the costs of 2-hour multiprofessional in situ hospital trauma team simulation training and its effects on teams’ non-technical skills using the T-NOTECHS instrument.BackgroundSimulation is a feasible and effective teaching and learning method. Calculating the costs of simulated trauma team training in medical emergency situations can yield valuable information for improving its overall cost-effectiveness.DesignA prospective cohort study.SettingTrauma resuscitation room in Central Finland Hospital, Finland.Participants475 medical professionals in 81 consecutive, simulated trauma teams.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTeam simulation training costs in 2017 and 2018 were analysed in the following two phases: (1) start-up costs and (2) costs of education. Primary outcome measures were training costs per participant and training costs per team. Secondary outcome measures were non-technical skills, which were measured on a 5–25-point scale using the T-NOTECHS instrument.ResultsThe annual mean total costs of trauma team simulation training were €58 000 for 40 training sessions and 238 professionals. Mean cost per participant was €203. Mean cost per team was €1220. The annual costs of simulation training markedly decreased when at least 70–80 teams participated in the training. Mean change in T-NOTECHS score after simulation training was +2.86 points (95% CI 1.97 to 3.75;+14.5%).ConclusionsThe greater the number of teams trained per year, the lower the costs per trauma team. In this study, we developed an activity-based costing method to calculate the costs of trauma team simulation training to help stakeholders make decisions about whether to initiate or increase existing trauma team simulation training or to obtain these services elsewhere.

Ceiling effects for "Administration" "Effects" and "Overall Satisfaction" domains were also > 40%, which implied high levels of satisfaction in these areas. For CSPQ, ceiling effects for "Image Quality" was 33.3%. Internal consistency was strong in most instances [PSPQ: "Preparation" (α = .93), "Reaction to Agent" (α = .40); CSPQ and mCSPQ: "Preparation" (α = .99, .99) and "Administration" (α = .93, .92). Inter-item correlations for PSPQ ranged from -0.01 to 0.96, which are small to strong; CPSQ ranged from 0.15 to 0.96, which are small to strong; mCPSQ ranged from 0.81 to 0.99, which are strong. ConClusions: Results suggest that when administered in real-world clinical settings, the PSPQ, CPSQ, and mCPSQ are capable of generating scores across the distribution of available responses (though clustering at upper and lower bound was observed in some instances), that are sufficiently reliable for most research purposes.

No abstract