Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28320312›Full record

ArticleBMC anesthesiology2017

The effect of an electronic cognitive aid on the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction during caesarean section: a prospective randomised simulation study.

Michael St Pierre, Bjoern Luetcke, Dieter Strembski, Christopher Schmitt, Georg Breuer

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Informatics Interventions for Maternal Morbidity: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

5 authors.

Michael St PierreAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. michael.st.pierre@kfa.imed.uni-erlangen.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6263-5261
Bjoern LuetckeAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Dieter StrembskiAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Christopher SchmittAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Georg BreuerAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCognitive aids have come to be viewed as promising tools in the management of perioperative critical events. The majority of published simulation studies have focussed on perioperative crises that are characterised by time pressure, rare occurrence, or complex management steps (e.g., cardiac arrest emergencies, management of the difficult airway). At present, there is limited information on the usefulness of cognitive aids in critical situations with moderate time pressure and complexity. Intraoperative myocardial infarction may be an emergency to which these limitations apply.

methodsAnaesthetic teams were allocated to control (no cognitive aid; n = 10) or intervention (cognitive aid provided; n = 10) groups. The primary aim of this study was to compare cognitive aid versus memory for intraoperative ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management in a simulation of caesarean delivery under spinal anaesthesia. We identified nine evidence-based metrics of essential care from current guidelines and subdivided them into mandatory (high level of evidence; no interference with surgery) and optional (lower class of recommendation; possible impact on surgery) tasks. Six clinically relevant tasks were added by consensus. Implementation of these steps was measured by scoring task items in a binary fashion (yes/no). The interval between the diagnosis of STEMI and the first contact with the cardiac catheterisation lab was measured. To determine whether or not the cognitive aid had prompted an action, participants from the cognitive aid group were interviewed during debriefing on every single treatment step. At the end of the simulation, session participants were asked to complete a survey.

resultsThe presence of the cognitive aid did not shorten the time interval until the cardiac catheterisation lab was contacted. The availability of the cognitive aid improved task performance in the tasks identified from the guidelines (93% vs. 69%; p < 0.001) as well as overall task performance (87.5% vs. 59%; p < 0.001). The observed difference in performance can be attributed to the use of the cognitive aid, as performance from memory alone would have been comparable across both groups. Trainees appeared to derive greater benefit from the cognitive aid than did consultants and nurses.

conclusionsThe management of intraoperative ST-elevation myocardial infarction can be improved if teams use a cognitive aid. Trainees appeared to derive greater benefit from the cognitive aid than did consultants and nurses.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesDisease ManagementCesarean SectionFemaleHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsPregnancyPregnancy Complications, CardiovascularProspective StudiesRandom AllocationSimulation TrainingSingle-Blind MethodST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionTask Performance and AnalysisChecklistMyocardial infarctionObstetricsPatient safetySimulation

Identifiers

PMID28320312
PMCPMC5359845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.