ReviewAcute medicine & surgery
Challenges for interprofessional simulation-based sedation training courses: Mini review.
Review in Acute medicine & surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Involvement of anesthesiologists in pediatric sedation and analgesia outside the operating room in Japan: is it too late, or is there still time?Journal of anesthesia · 2025Review
- Integrating Simulation-Based Education Into Regional Clinical Clerkship for Future Doctors: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Mastering Sedation and Associated Respiratory Events through Simulation-Based Training: A Randomised Controlled Trial Involving Non-Anaesthesiology Residents.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024Article
- Positive emotions for promoting quality improvement of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy for COVID-19: In situ interprofessional simulation.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
- Challenges for interprofessional simulation-based sedation training courses: Mini review.Acute medicine & surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sedation for invasive procedures is given for various clinical purposes to patients of all ages worldwide. However, sedation is a continuum to general anesthesia and contains severe inherent risks leading to mortality. Providing a simulation-based sedation training course (SEDTC) to various medical staff could be an effective strategy to improve patient and medical safety associated with sedation. The SEDTC generally includes basic airway management such as upper airway obstruction release or rapid response action toward excessive sedation, utilizing problem-based learning or simulators. However, participation alone in the SEDTC can only achieve Level 1 (reaction) or 2 (learning) in the Kirkpatrick model. A patient safety improvement of Level 3 (transfer) or 4 (result) of the Kirkpatrick model can be achieved when all members related to sedation undergo experiential learning and reach a consensus. Accordingly, in-hospital interprofessional SEDTC focusing on a resilience approach is essential to achieve effective sedation patient safety in Level 3 or 4 of the Kirkpatrick model.
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.