Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25392805›Full record

ArticleSpringerPlus2014

Significance of debriefing methods in simulation-based sedation training courses for medical safety improvement in Japan.

Nobuyasu Komasawa, Takuro Sanuki, Shunsuke Fujiwara, Masanori Haba, Ryusuke Ueki, Yoshiroh Kaminoh, Toshiaki Minami

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SpringerPlus, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02718794 (Crossover Study in Simulation-based and Problem-based Learning in Practice Guideline for Difficult Airway Management), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02718794 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Crossover Study in Simulation-based and Problem-based Learning in Practice Guideline for Difficult Airway Management

TypeinterventionalSponsorSiriraj HospitalRan2015 to 2016Enrolled36ConditionsEducationArmsSimulation training, Problem-based learning
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nobuyasu KomasawaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Osaka Medical College, Daigaku-machi 2-7, Takatsukishi City, Osaka, 569-8686 Japan.
Takuro SanukiDepartment of Dental Anesthesiology, Nagasaki University, Sakamoto 1-7-1, Nagasaki City, Nagasaki, 852-8588 Japan.
Shunsuke FujiwaraDepartment of Anesthesiology, Osaka Medical College, Daigaku-machi 2-7, Takatsukishi City, Osaka, 569-8686 Japan.
Masanori HabaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wakayama Red Cross Hospital, Komatsubara 4-20, Wakayama City, Wakayama, 640-8558 Japan.
Ryusuke UekiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, Mukogawa-cho, Nisinomiya City, Hyogo, 663-8501 Japan.
Yoshiroh KaminohDivision of Anesthesiology, Social Insurance Kinan Hospital, Shinjo-cho, Tanabe City, Wakayama, Japan.
Toshiaki MinamiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Osaka Medical College, Daigaku-machi 2-7, Takatsukishi City, Osaka, 569-8686 Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Practice Guidelines for Sedation and Analgesia by Non-Anesthesiologists (ASA-SED), a sedation training course aimed at improving medical safety was developed by the Japanese Association for Medical Simulation in 2011. This study evaluated the effect of debriefing on participants' perceptions of the essential points of the ASA-SED. A total of 38 novice doctors participated in the sedation training course during the research period. Of these doctors, 18 participated in the debriefing group, and 20 participated in non-debriefing group. Scoring of participants' guideline perceptions was conducted using an evaluation sheet (nine items, 16 points) created based on the ASA-SED. The debriefing group showed a greater perception of the ASA-SED, as reflected in the significantly higher scores on the evaluation sheet (median, 16 points) than the control group (median, 13 points; p < 0.05). No significant differences were identified before or during sedation, but the difference after sedation was significant (p < 0.05). Debriefing after sedation training courses may contribute to better perception of the ASA-SED, and may lead to enhanced attitudes toward medical safety during sedation and analgesia.

Indexed as

DebriefingMedical safetySedation and analgesiaSimulation training

Identifiers

PMID25392805
PMCPMC4218926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.