Low-flow irrigated ablation provides favorable lesion characteristics for posterior LA ablation without increasing the risk of adverse events.

No abstract

Background Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) is a multistep process that emergency physicians commonly perform. Unfortunately, there is little published in the graduate medical education literature regarding the use of checklists for RSI education. Methods We developed a pre-intubation checklist for RSI preparation and evaluated emergency medicine residents’ use of it. We developed the checklist using a three-round modified Delphi process among a group of emergency medicine faculty physicians within our institution. Over a three-year period, residents were randomized into two groups: a “checklist group” and a “without-checklist group.” Residents were then evaluated for RSI critical step completion in a simulated critically ill patient by two independent study investigators. Inter-rater reliability kappa scores were calculated. Following completion of the scenario, residents in both groups were asked to complete an anonymous survey. Both groups had access to the checklist at the time of the survey. The survey was used to determine if they found the checklist helpful. Odds ratios with p-values, at an alpha of 0.05 for significance, were computed for checklist items comparing the checklist and without-checklist groups. Data analysis was performed using SAS software (SAS, Cary, NC v 9.4). This study was approved by the authors’ Institutional Review Board. Results Each assessment was completed by two investigators. Inter-rater reliability was substantial (κ=0.79). Residents having access to the checklist were more likely to verbalize a critical step with a p-value of < 0.0001 and an odds ratio of 2.17 (95% CI: 1.48, 3.19). The checklist group normalized vital signs prior to intubation in 25/28 (89%, 95% CI: 72.81, 96.29) versus only 6/29 (21%, 95% CI: 9.85, 38.39) with a p-value of <0.0001 in the without-checklist group. The checklist group evaluated for difficult laryngoscopy 26/28 (93%, 95% CI: 77.36, 98.02) versus only 21/29 (72%, CI 95% 54.28, 85.30) with p=0.0223 in the without-checklist group. All of the surveyed residents indicated that the checklist would be helpful for future use in the ED. Conclusion This RSI checklist improved adherence to preparatory steps of RSI. Utilizing a checklist increased evaluation for a difficult airway and normalizing vital signs. Residents found the checklist helpful for ED use.