ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2021
Training non-intensivist doctors to work with COVID-19 patients in intensive care units.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Health worker education during the COVID-19 pandemic: global disruption, responses and lessons for the future-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Human resources for health · 2023Pooled it
- A Multidisciplinary ICU Clerkship Curriculum Incorporating Simulation and Competency-Based Education: Design, Implementation, and Early Outcomes.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- The impact of the massive open online course C19_SPACE during the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical knowledge enhancement: a study among medical doctors and nurses.Intensive care medicine · 2024Article
- Repurposing surgical wards in pandemics - An appraisal of outcomes of COVID-19 patients treated in Orthopaedic wards.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Education and Training Adaptations for Health Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review of Lessons Learned and Innovations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The impact of a "short-term" basic intensive care training program on the knowledge of nonintensivist doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic: An experience from a population-dense low- and middle-income country.Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses · 2023Observational
- Preparedness and management during the first phase of the COVID-19 outbreak - a survey among emergency primary care services in Norway.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Feasibility Study of a Fully Synchronous Virtual Critical Care Elective Focused on Learner Engagement.Cureus · 2022Article
- Prediction of SARS-CoV-2-Related Lung Inflammation Spreading by V:ERITAS (Vanvitelli Early Recognition of Inflamed Thoracic Areas Spreading).Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Pulmonologists' work and clinical life during the COVID-19 pandemic: a society-led survey.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2022Review
- The COVID-19 Patient in the Surgical Intensive Care Unit.The Surgical clinics of North America · 2022Review
- A perspective of massive open online courses (MOOCs) and public health.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- A descriptive study of the surge response and outcomes of ICU patients with COVID-19 during first wave in Nordic countries.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Who Cares What the Doctor Feels: The Responsibility of Health Politics for Burnout in the Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Training non-intensivist doctors to work with COVID-19 patients in intensive care units.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2021Article
- Challenges of Redeployment to ICU: A Qualitative Study Exploring Nurses' Experience During the Coronavirus Pandemic.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDue to an expected surge of COVID-19 patients in need of mechanical ventilation, the intensive care capacity was doubled at Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, in March 2020. This resulted in an urgent need for doctors with competence in working with critically ill COVID-19 patients. A training course and a theoretical test for non-intensivist doctors were developed. The aims of this study were to gather validity evidence for the theoretical test and explore the effects of the course.
methodsThe 1-day course was comprised of theoretical sessions and hands-on training in ventilator use, hemodynamic monitoring, vascular access, and use of personal protective equipment. Validity evidence was gathered for the test by comparing answers from novices and experts in intensive care. Doctors who participated in the course completed the test before (pretest), after (posttest), and again within 8 weeks following the course (retention test).
resultsFifty-four non-intensivist doctors from 15 different specialties with a wide range in clinical experience level completed the course. The test consisted of 23 questions and demonstrated a credible pass-fail standard at 16 points. Mean pretest score was 11.9 (SD 3.0), mean posttest score 20.6 (1.8), and mean retention test score 17.4 (2.2). All doctors passed the posttest.
conclusionNon-intensivist doctors, irrespective of experience level, can acquire relevant knowledge for working in the ICU through a focused 1-day evidence-based course. This knowledge was largely retained as shown by a multiple-choice test supported by validity evidence. The test is available in appendix and online.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.