ArticleJournal of anesthesia2018
The effect of in situ simulation training on the performance of tasks related to patient safety during sedation.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- GENESISS 2-Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review.BMC medical education · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- GENESISS 1-Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a scoping review and conceptual model.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Training in pediatric anesthesia in Japan: how should we come along?Journal of anesthesia · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the feasibility and impacts of in situ simulation in emergency medicine-a mixed-method study protocol.BMJ open · 2021Article
- The Use of in situ Simulation in Healthcare Education: Current Perspectives.Advances in medical education and practice · 2020Review
- Short and long arm cast and pain after discharge in children who underwent reduction of distal forearm fracture in the Emergency Department: A study protocol for a randomized comparative effectiveness study.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In many countries, procedural sedation outside of the operating room is performed by pediatricians. We examined if in situ sedation simulation training (SST) of pediatricians improves the performance of tasks related to patient safety during sedation in the Emergency Department (ED). We performed a single-center, quasi-experimental, study evaluating the performance of sedation, before-and-after SST. Sixteen pediatricians were evaluated during sedation as part of their usual practice, using the previously validated Sedation-Performance-Score (SPS). This tool evaluates physician behaviors during sedation that are conducive to safe patient outcomes. Following the sedation, providers completed SST, followed by a structured debriefing. They were then re-evaluated with the SPS during a subsequent patient sedation in the ED. Using multivariate regression, odds ratios were calculated for each SPS component, and were compared before and after the SST. Thirty-two sedations were performed, 16 before and 16 after SST. SPS scores improved from a median of 4 (IQR 2-5) to 6 (IQR 4-7) following SST (p < 0.0009, median difference 2, 95% CI 1-3). SST was associated with improved performance in four SPS components. The findings of this pilot study suggest that sedation simulation training of pediatricians improves several tasks related to patient safety during sedation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29372412What OpenQuestion holds
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.