Search

Once the diagnosis has been made,the main goals are identifying and removing the offendingstimulus,applyingairwaymaneuverstoopentheairway,andadministering anesthetic agents if the obstruction is not re-lieved. The purpose of this case scenario is to highlight keypoints essential for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatmentof laryngospasm occurring during anesthesia.

Background Previous studies have indicated that fiberoptic orotracheal intubation (FOI) skills can be learned outside the operating room. The purpose of this study was to determine which of two educational interventions allows learners to gain greater capacity for performing the procedure. Methods Respiratory therapists were randomly assigned to a low-fidelity or high-fidelity training model group. The low-fidelity group was guided by experts, on a nonanatomic model designed to refine fiberoptic manipulation skills. The high-fidelity group practiced their skills on a computerized virtual reality bronchoscopy simulator. After training, subjects performed two consecutive FOIs on healthy, anesthetized patients with predicted "easy" intubations. Each subject's FOI was evaluated by blinded examiners, using a validated global rating scale and checklist. Success and time were also measured. Results Data were analyzed using a two-way mixed design analysis of variance. There was no significant difference between the low-fidelity (n = 14) and high-fidelity (n = 14) model groups when compared with the global rating scale, checklist, time, and success at achieving tracheal intubation (all P = not significant). Second attempts in both groups were significantly better than first attempts (P < 0.001), and there was no interaction between "fidelity of training model" and "first versus second attempt" scores. Conclusions There was no added benefit from training on a costly virtual reality model with respect to transfer of FOI skills to intraoperative patient care. Second attempts in both groups were significantly better than first attempts. Low-fidelity models for FOI training outside the operating room are an alternative for programs with budgetary constraints.

Background The debriefing process during simulation-based education has been poorly studied despite its educational importance. Videotape feedback is an adjunct that may enhance the impact of the debriefing and in turn maximize learning. The purpose of this study was to investigate the value of the debriefing process during simulation and to compare the educational efficacy of two types of feedback, oral feedback and videotape-assisted oral feedback, against control (no debriefing). Methods Forty-two anesthesia residents were enrolled in the study. After completing a pretest scenario, participants were randomly assigned to receive no debriefing, oral feedback, or videotape-assisted oral feedback. The debriefing focused on nontechnical skills performance guided by crisis resource management principles. Participants were then required to manage a posttest scenario. The videotapes of all performances were later reviewed by two blinded independent assessors who rated participants' nontechnical skills using a validated scoring system. Results Participants' nontechnical skills did not improve in the control group, whereas the provision of oral feedback, either assisted or not assisted with videotape review, resulted in significant improvement (P < 0.005). There was no difference in improvement between oral and video-assisted oral feedback groups. Conclusions Exposure to a simulated crisis without constructive debriefing by instructors offers little benefit to trainees. The addition of video review did not offer any advantage over oral feedback alone. Valuable simulation training can therefore be achieved even when video technology is not available.

Background Simulation-based training is useful in improving physicians' skills. However, no randomized controlled trials have been able to demonstrate the effects of simulation teaching in real-life patient care. This study aimed to determine whether simulation-based training or an interactive seminar resulted in better patient care during weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-a high stakes clinical setting. Methods This study was conducted as a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. After institutional research board approval, 20 anesthesiology trainees, postgraduate year 4 or higher, inexperienced in CPB weaning, and 60 patients scheduled for elective coronary artery bypass grafting were recruited. Each trainee received a teaching syllabus for CPB weaning 1 week before attempting to wean a patient from CPB (pretest). One week later, each trainee received a 2-h training session with either high-fidelity simulation-based training or a 2-h interactive seminar. Each trainee then weaned patients from CPB within 2 weeks (posttest) and 5 weeks (retention test) from the intervention. Clinical performance was measured using the validated Anesthesiologists' Nontechnical Skills Global Rating Scale and a checklist of expected clinical actions. Results Pretest Global Rating Scale and checklist performances were similar. The simulation group scored significantly higher than the seminar group at both posttest (Global Rating Scale [mean +/- standard error]: 14.3 +/- 0.41 vs. 11.8 +/- 0.41, P < 0.001; checklist: 89.9 +/- 3.0% vs. 75.4 +/- 3.0%, P = 0.003) and retention test (Global Rating Scale: 14.1 +/- 0.41 vs. 11.7 +/- 0.41, P < 0.001; checklist: 93.2 +/- 2.4% vs. 77.0 +/- 2.4%, P < 0.001). Conclusion Skills required to wean a patient from CPB can be acquired through simulation-based training. Compared with traditional interactive seminars, simulation-based training leads to improved performance in patient care by senior trainees in anesthesiology.

Previous studies have indicated that fiberoptic orotracheal intubation (FOI) skills can be learned outside the operating room. The purpose of this study was to determine which of two educational interventions allows learners to gain greater capacity for performing the procedure.Respiratory therapists were randomly assigned to a low-fidelity or high-fidelity training model group. The low-fidelity group was guided by experts, on a nonanatomic model designed to refine fiberoptic manipulation skills. The high-fidelity group practiced their skills on a computerized virtual reality bronchoscopy simulator. After training, subjects performed two consecutive FOIs on healthy, anesthetized patients with predicted "easy" intubations. Each subject's FOI was evaluated by blinded examiners, using a validated global rating scale and checklist. Success and time were also measured.Data were analyzed using a two-way mixed design analysis of variance. There was no significant difference between the low-fidelity (n = 14) and high-fidelity (n = 14) model groups when compared with the global rating scale, checklist, time, and success at achieving tracheal intubation (all P = not significant). Second attempts in both groups were significantly better than first attempts (P0.001), and there was no interaction between "fidelity of training model" and "first versus second attempt" scores.There was no added benefit from training on a costly virtual reality model with respect to transfer of FOI skills to intraoperative patient care. Second attempts in both groups were significantly better than first attempts. Low-fidelity models for FOI training outside the operating room are an alternative for programs with budgetary constraints.

Background Patient simulators possess features for performance assessment. However, the concurrent validity and the "added value" of simulator-based examinations over traditional examinations have not been adequately addressed. The current study compared a simulator-based examination with an oral examination for assessing the management skills of senior anesthesia residents. Methods Twenty senior anesthesia residents were assessed sequentially in resuscitation and trauma scenarios using two assessment modalities: an oral examination, followed by a simulator-based examination. Two independent examiners scored the performances with a previously validated global rating scale developed by the Anesthesia Oral Examination Board of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Different examiners were used to rate the oral and simulation performances. Results Interrater reliability was good to excellent across scenarios and modalities: intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.77 to 0.87. The within-scenario between-modality score correlations (concurrent validity) were moderate: r = 0.52 (resuscitation) and r = 0.53 (trauma) (P < 0.05). Forty percent of the average score variance was accounted for by the participants, and 30% was accounted for by the participant-by-modality interaction. Conclusions Variance in participant scores suggests that the examination is able to perform as expected in terms of discriminating among test takers. The rather large participant-by-modality interaction, along with the pattern of correlations, suggests that an examinee's performance varies based on the testing modality and a trainee who "knows how" in an oral examination may not necessarily be able to "show how" in a simulation laboratory. Simulation may therefore be considered a useful adjunct to the oral examination.

Background Critical incident reporting and observational studies have identified nontechnical skills that are vital to successful anesthesia crisis management. Examples of such skills include task management, team working, situation awareness, and decision making. These skills are not necessarily acquired through clinical experience and may need to be specifically taught. This study uses a high-fidelity patient simulator to assess the effect of repeated exposure to simulated anesthesia crises on the nontechnical skills of anesthesia residents. Methods After institutional research board approval and informed consent, 20 anesthesia residents were recruited. Each resident was randomized to participate as the primary anesthesiologist in the management of three different simulated anesthesia crises using a high-fidelity patient simulator. After each session, videotaped footage was used to facilitate debriefing of their nontechnical skills. The videotapes were later reviewed by two expert blinded independent assessors who rated each resident's nontechnical skills by using a previously validated and reliable marking system. Results : A significant improvement in the nontechnical skills of residents was demonstrated from their first to second session and from their first to third session (both P < 0.005). However from their second to third session, no significant improvement was observed. Interrater reliability between assessors was modest (single rater intraclass correlation = 0.53). Conclusion A single exposure to anesthesia crises using a high-fidelity patient simulator can improve the nontechnical skills of anesthesia residents. However, an additional simulation session may confer little or no additional benefit.