Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35017175›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2022

Implementation of a rapid response system at an isolated radiotherapy facility through simulation training.

Hidemasa Kawamura, Yasuhiro Komatsu, Kazumi Tanaka, Masafumi Kanamoto, Masaru Tobe, Chisato Usami, Hiroshi Hinohara, Kiyohiro Oshima, Yoko Kitada, Kazuhisa Tsuda and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

13 authors.

Hidemasa KawamuraGunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan kawa@gunma-u.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-4899-1715
Yasuhiro KomatsuDepartment of Healthcare Quality and Safety, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Maebashi, Japan.
Kazumi TanakaDepartment of Healthcare Quality and Safety, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Maebashi, Japan.
Masafumi KanamotoIntensive Care Unit, Gunma University Hospital, Meabashi, Japan.
Masaru TobeIntensive Care Unit, Gunma University Hospital, Meabashi, Japan.
Chisato UsamiIntensive Care Unit, Gunma University Hospital, Meabashi, Japan.
Hiroshi HinoharaIntensive Care Unit, Gunma University Hospital, Meabashi, Japan.
Kiyohiro OshimaEmergency Medical Center, Gunma University Hospital, Meabashi, Japan.
Yoko KitadaGunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan.
Kazuhisa TsudaGunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan.
Tomoaki OganoGunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan.
Hirofumi ShimadaGunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan.
Tatsuya OhnoGunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Maebashi, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A rapid response system is required in a radiotherapy department for patients experiencing a critical event when access to an emergency department is poor due to geographic location and the patient is immobilised with a fixation device. We, therefore, rebuilt the response system and tested it through onsite simulations. A multidisciplinary core group was created and onsite simulations were conducted using a Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. We identified the important characteristics of our facility, including its distance from the emergency department; the presence of many staff with little direct contact with patients; the treatment room environment and patient fixation with radiotherapy equipment. We also examined processes in each phase of the emergency response: detecting an emergency, calling the medical emergency team (MET), MET transportation to the site and on-site response and patient transportation to the emergency department. The protocol was modified, and equipment was updated. On-site simulations were held with and without explanation of the protocol and training scenario in advance. The time for the MET to arrive at the site during a 2017 simulation prior to the present project was 7 min, whereas the time to arrive after the first simulation session was shortened to 5 min and was then shortened further to 4 min in the second session, despite no prior explanation of the situation. A multidisciplinary project for emergency response with on-site simulations was conducted at an isolated radiation facility. A carefully planned emergency response is important not only in heavy ion therapy facilities but also in other departments and facilities that do not have easy access to hospital emergency departments.

Indexed as

Simulation TrainingHumansTransportation of Patientsmedical emergency teampatient safetyquality improvementsimulation

Identifiers

PMID35017175
PMCPMC8753419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.