A Randomized, Controlled Trial of In Situ Pediatric Advanced Life Support Recertification (“Pediatric Advanced Life Support Reconstructed”) Compared With Standard Pediatric Advanced Life Support Recertification for ICU Frontline Providers*

Kurosawa, Hiroshi; Ikeyama, Takanari; Achuff, Patricia; Perkel, Madeline; Watson, Christine; Monachino, AnneMarie; Remy, Daphne; Deutsch, Ellen S.; Buchanan, Newton; Anderson, JoDee M.; Berg, Robert A.; Nadkarni, Vinay; Nishisaki, Akira

doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000000024

Cited by 80 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…138 The studies that used periodic eLearning and mailings (very-low-quality evidence, downgraded for indirectness and imprecision) demonstrated no benefit from the refreshers except in the performance on mock arrests. Only 1 of the studies related directly to the research question comparing frequent refreshers to standard retraining intervals, using manikin-based simulation 137 ; this study documented better scores on the CPT and equivalent outcomes for the BAT while using less total time of retraining: 4.5 versus 7.5 hours (low-quality evidence, downgraded for imprecision).…”

Section: Consensus On Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Part 8: Education, Implementation, and Teams

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Consensus On Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Part 8: Education, Implementation, and Teams

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…9,97 Unfortunately, the literature directly assessing the question of the retraining intervals is limited. In 1 pediatric ALS study, 123 frequent refreshers with manikin-based simulation showed better clinical performance scores and equivalent behavioral performance scores, using less total time of retraining, when compared with standard retraining intervals.…”

Section: Training Intervals Eit 633 -Updatedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Part 14: Education

Bhanji¹,

Donoghue²,

Wolff³

et al. 2015

Circulation

241

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…3 The results of this CEP led us to believe that overall performance of the staff could be improved if staff members were trained in situ and over a short period because each member would acquire the same background and follow the same algorithm. Although several studies have shown that in situ simulation training improves the individual skills of professionals 4,5 and the quality of care, [6][7][8][9][10] to our knowledge, there are no data regarding the impact of in situ training on global performance in neonatal resuscitation .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In Situ Simulation Training for Neonatal Resuscitation: An RCT

Rubio-Gurung¹,

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: High-fidelity simulation improves individual skills in neonatal resuscitation. Usually, training is performed in a simulation center. Little is known about the impact of in situ training on overall team performance. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:In situ high-fidelity simulation training of 80% of a maternity' s staff significantly improved overall team performance in neonatal resuscitation (technical skills and teamwork). Fewer hazardous events occurred, and delay in improving the heart rate was shorter. abstract OBJECTIVES: High-fidelity simulation is an effective tool in teaching neonatal resuscitation skills to professionals. We aimed to determine whether in situ simulation training (for ∼80% of the delivery room staff) improved neonatal resuscitation performed by the staff at maternities. METHODS:A baseline evaluation of 12 maternities was performed: a random sample of 10 professionals in each unit was presented with 2 standardized scenarios played on a neonatal high-fidelity simulator. The medical procedures were video recorded for later assessments. The 12 maternities were then randomly assigned to receive the intervention (a 4-hour simulation training session delivered in situ for multidisciplinary groups of 6 professionals) or not receive it. All maternities were evaluated again at 3 months after the intervention. The videos were assessed by 2 neonatologists blinded to the pre-/postintervention as well as to the intervention/control groups. The performance was assessed using a technical score and a team score. RESULTS:After intervention, the median technical score was significantly higher for scenarios 1 and 2 for the intervention group compared with the control group (P = .01 and 0.004, respectively), the median team score was significantly higher (P , .001) for both scenarios. In the intervention group, the frequency of achieving a heart rate .90 per minute at 3 minutes improved significantly (P = .003), and the number of hazardous events decreased significantly (P , .001). CONCLUSIONS:In situ simulation training with multidisciplinary teams can effectively improve technical skills and teamwork in neonatal resuscitation. Pediatrics 2014;134:e790-e797

show abstract

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of In Situ Pediatric Advanced Life Support Recertification (“Pediatric Advanced Life Support Reconstructed”) Compared With Standard Pediatric Advanced Life Support Recertification for ICU Frontline Providers*

Cited by 80 publications

References 27 publications

Part 8: Education, Implementation, and Teams

Part 8: Education, Implementation, and Teams

Part 14: Education

In Situ Simulation Training for Neonatal Resuscitation: An RCT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About