No abstract

Introduction:Prehospital and community hospital healthcare providers in the United States must be prepared to respond to burn disasters. Continuing education is the most frequently utilized method of updating knowledge, skills, and competence among healthcare professionals. Since preparedness training must meet multiple educational demands, it is vital to understand how participants'work and educational experience and the program's content and delivery methods impact knowledge acquisition, and how learning influences confidence and competence to perform new skills.Purpose:The purpose of this exploratory, convenience sample study was to identify healthcare provider characteristics and continuing education training content areas that were predictive of self-reported improvement in competence after attending a mass-casualty burn disaster continuing education program.Methods:Logistic regression analysis of data from a post-training evaluation from nine, one-day continuing education conferences on mass burn care was used to identify factors associated with improved self-reported competency to respond to mass burn casualties.Results:The following factors were associated most closely with increased self-reported competency: (1) prehospital work setting (odds ratio (OR) = 3.06, confidence interval (CI) = 0.83–11.30, p = 0.09); (2) 11 or more years of practice (OR = 0.31, CI = 0.09–1.08, p = 0.07); and (3) practice in an urban setting (OR = 0.01, CI = 0.18–0.82, p >0.01). Confidence items included: (1) ability to implement appropriate airway management modalities (OR = 2.31, CI = 1.03–5.17, p >0.04); (2) manage patients with electrical injuries (OR = 4.86, CI = 1.84–12.85, p >0.001); (3) identify non-survivable injuries (OR = 2.24, CI = 0.93–5.43, p = 0.07); and (4) recognize special problems associated with burns in young children or older adults (OR = 2.14, CI = 0.87–5.23, p = 0.10). The final model explained 89.9% of the variability in self-reported competence.Conclusions:Interventions used to train healthcare providers for burn disasters must cover a broad range of topics. However, learning needs may vary by practice setting, work experience, and previous exposure to disaster events. This evaluation research provides three-fold information for continuing education research: (1) to identify content areas that should be emphasized in future burn care training; (2) to be used as a model for CE evaluation in other domains; and (3) to provide support that many factors must be considered when designing a CE program. Results may be useful to others who are planning CE training programs.

"Preparing for Burn Disasters: A Training Course for Pre-Hospital and Hospital Professionals in Kansas," a continuing education program designed to provide licensed health care practitioners a training opportunity for multiple burn victim incidents, emphasized the challenges that the community-wide multidisciplinary team faces when responding to burn disasters. A pre-post survey design was used to assess changes in participants' knowledge and self-rated ability, confidence, and competence to perform in a burn disaster before and after training. Participants (N = 383) were predominantly female (71.1%), 40 years or older (57.7%), nurses (52.2%), were employed in a pre-hospital care setting (38%), and had worked in healthcare for 10 years or fewer (53.6%). The percentage of correct responses pre- vs post-test increased between 30% and 65% on two-thirds of the knowledge items. On the basis of paired-samples t-test analysis, statistically significant increases in participants' overall self-ratings of ability and confidence in burn management were observed in every content area. Most participants (64%) felt competent or highly competent to manage multiple burn casualties after the training program, and most participants (58%) indicated that they intended to incorporate the newly acquired knowledge into their daily practice within 2 weeks. Evaluation results demonstrate that a successful program was designed and implemented. The curriculum and teaching methods achieved desired goals for improved knowledge, which appear to have been translated to enhanced abilities, confidence and competence in burn assessment and treatment modalities.

Background The role of advanced registered nurse practitioners and physician assistants in emergency departments, trauma centers, and critical care is becoming more widely accepted. These personnel, collectively known as advanced practice providers, expand physicians’ capabilities and are being increasingly recruited to provide care and perform invasive procedures that were previously performed exclusively by physicians. Objectives To determine whether the quality of tube thoracostomies performed by advanced practice providers is comparable to that performed by trauma surgeons and to ascertain whether the complication rates attributable to tube thoracostomies differ on the basis of who performed the procedure. Methods Retrospective blinded reviews of patients’ charts and radiographs were conducted to determine differences in quality indicators, complications, and outcomes of tube thoracostomies by practitioner type: trauma surgeons vs advanced practice providers. Results Differences between practitioner type in insertion complications, complications requiring additional interventions, hospital length of stay, and morbidity were not significant. The only significant difference was a complication related to placement of the tube: when the tube extended caudad, toward the feet, from the insertion site. Interrater reliability ranged from good to very good. Conclusions Use of advanced practice providers provides consistent and quality tube thoracostomies. Employment of these practitioners may be a safe and reasonable solution for staffing trauma centers.

The regionalization process has been beneficial for LHDs and produced tangible and intangible benefits. Barriers to regionalization expansion should be addressed for additional collaborative ventures.