Building the Evidence on Simulation Validity

Effects of Simulation Fidelity on Health Care Providers on Team Training-A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

This systematic review, following PRISMA standards, aimed to assess the effectiveness of higher versus lower fidelity simulation on health care providers engaged in team training. A comprehensive search from January 1, 2011 to January 24, 2023 identified 1390 studies of which 14 randomized (n = 1530) and 5 case controlled (n = 257) studies met the inclusion criteria. The certainty of evidence was very low due to a high risk of bias and inconsistency. Heterogeneity prevented any metaanalysis. Limited evidence showed benefit for confidence, technical skills, and nontechnical skills. No significant difference was found in knowledge outcomes and teamwork abilities between lower and higher fidelity simulation. Participants reported higher satisfaction but also higher stress with higher fidelity materials. Both higher and lower fidelity simulation can be beneficial for team training, with higher fidelity simulation preferred by participants if resources allow. Standardizing definitions and outcomes, as well as conducting robust cost-comparative analyses, are important for future research.

Clinical triggers and vital signs influencing crisis acknowledgment and calls for help by anesthesiologists: A simulation-based observational study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

In a perioperative emergency, anesthesiologists must acknowledge the unfolding crisis promptly, call for timely assistance, and avert patient harm. We aimed to identify vital signs and qualitative factors prompting crisis acknowledgment and to compare responses between observers and participants in simulation.

DESIGN

Prospective, simulation-based, observational study.

SETTING

An anesthesia crisis resource management course at a freestanding simulation center.

SUBJECTS

Sixty attending anesthesiologists from a variety of practice settings.

INTERVENTIONS

In each case, a primary anesthesiologist in charge (PAIC) managed a simulated patient undergoing a uniformly scripted sequence of perioperative anaphylaxis and called for help from another anesthesiologist when a crisis began. Anesthesiologist observers (AOs) viewed the case separately and recorded times of crisis onset.

MEASUREMENTS

Simulation footage was reviewed by investigators for patient vital signs and participant behaviors at times of crisis acknowledgment, with the call for help as an explicit proxy for PAIC crisis acknowledgment. These factors were categorized, and group-level data were compared.

RESULTS

Nineteen PAICs and 41 AOs were included. Clinicians acknowledged crises around a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mmHg and oxygen saturation of 94% as anaphylactic shock progressed. PAICs acknowledged crises at a higher respiratory rate than AOs (20 vs. 18 breaths/min, p = 0.038). Other vitals and timing of crisis acknowledgment did not differ between PAICs and AOs. Nearly half of all participants (45%) identified crises at MAP <65 mmHg. Timing of crisis acknowledgment varied widely (range: 421 s).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite overall heterogeneity in clinical performance, anesthesiologists acknowledged crises per standard definitions of hypotension. Thresholds for crisis acknowledgment did not significantly differ between PAICs and AOs, suggesting minimal effect from active care responsibility. Many indicated crises at MAP <65 mmHg or after significant deterioration, risking failure-to-rescue events. We suggest that crisis management instruction should address triggers for requesting help.

Development and validation of the student ratings in clinical teaching scale in Australia: a methodological study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to devise a valid measurement for assessing clinical students' perceptions of teaching practices.

METHODS

A new tool was developed based on a meta-analysis encompassing effective clinical teaching-learning factors. Seventy-nine items were generated using a frequency (never to always) scale. The tool was applied to the University of New South Wales year 2, 3, and 6 medical students. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (exploratory factor analysis [EFA] and confirmatory factor analysis [CFA], respectively) were conducted to establish the tool’s construct validity and goodness of fit, and Cronbach’s α was used for reliability.

RESULTS

In total, 352 students (44.2%) completed the questionnaire. The EFA identified student-centered learning, problem-solving learning, self-directed learning, and visual technology (reliability, 0.77 to 0.89). CFA showed acceptable goodness of fit (chi-square P<0.01, comparative fit index=0.930 and Tucker-Lewis index=0.917, root mean square error of approximation=0.069, standardized root mean square residual=0.06).

CONCLUSION

The established tool—Student Ratings in Clinical Teaching (STRICT)—is a valid and reliable tool that demonstrates how students perceive clinical teaching efficacy. STRICT measures the frequency of teaching practices to mitigate the biases of acquiescence and social desirability. Clinical teachers may use the tool to adapt their teaching practices with more active learning activities and to utilize visual technology to facilitate clinical learning efficacy. Clinical educators may apply STRICT to assess how these teaching practices are implemented in current clinical settings.

Educating Anesthesiologists During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic and Beyond

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has altered approaches to anesthesiology education by shifting educational paradigms. This vision article discusses pre-COVID-19 educational methodologies and best evidence, adaptations required under COVID-19, and evidence for these modifications, and suggests future directions for anesthesiology education. Learning management systems provide structure to online learning. They have been increasingly utilized to improve access to didactic materials asynchronously. Despite some historic reservations, the pandemic has necessitated a rapid uptake across programs. Commercially available systems offer a wide range of peer-reviewed curricular options. The flipped classroom promotes learning foundational knowledge before teaching sessions with a focus on application during structured didactics. There is growing evidence that this approach is preferred by learners and may increase knowledge gain. The flipped classroom works well with learning management systems to disseminate focused preclass work. Care must be taken to keep virtual sessions interactive. Simulation, already used in anesthesiology, has been critical in preparation for the care of COVID-19 patients. Multidisciplinary, in situ simulations allow for rapid dissemination of new team workflows. Physical distancing and reduced availability of providers have required more sessions. Early pandemic decreases in operating volumes have allowed for this; future planning will have to incorporate smaller groups, sanitizing of equipment, and attention to use of personal protective equipment. Effective technical skills training requires instruction to mastery levels, use of deliberate practice, and high-quality feedback. Reduced sizes of skill-training workshops and approaches for feedback that are not in-person will be required. Mock oral and objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) allow for training and assessment of competencies often not addressed otherwise. They provide formative and summative data and objective measurements of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones. They also allow for preparation for the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) APPLIED examination. Adaptations to teleconferencing or videoconferencing can allow for continued use. Benefits of teaching in this new era include enhanced availability of asynchronous learning and opportunities to apply universal, expert-driven curricula. Burdens include decreased social interactions and potential need for an increased amount of smaller, live sessions. Acquiring learning management systems and holding more frequent simulation and skills sessions with fewer learners may increase cost. With the increasing dependency on multimedia and technology support for teaching and learning, one important focus of educational research is on the development and evaluation of strategies that reduce extraneous processing and manage essential and generative processing in virtual learning environments. Collaboration to identify and implement best practices has the potential to improve education for all learners.

Do cognitive aids reduce error rates in resuscitation team performance? Trial of emergency medicine protocols in simulation training (TEMPIST) in Australia

BACKGROUND

Resuscitation of patients with time-critical and life-threatening illness represents a cognitive challenge for emergency room (ER) clinicians. We designed a cognitive aid, the Emergency Protocols Handbook, to simplify clinical management and team processes. Resuscitation guidelines were reformatted into simple, single step-by-step pathways. This Australian randomised controlled trial tested the effectiveness of this cognitive aid in a simulated ER environment by observing team error rates when current resuscitation guidelines were followed, with and without the handbook.

METHODS

Resuscitation teams were randomised to manage two scenarios with the handbook and two without in a high-fidelity simulation centre. Each scenario was video-recorded. The primary outcome measure was error rates (the number of errors made out of 15 key tasks per scenario). Key tasks varied by scenario. Each team completed four scenarios and was measured on 60 key tasks. Participants were surveyed regarding their perception of the usefulness of the handbook.

RESULTS

Twenty-one groups performed 84 ER crisis simulations. The unadjusted error rate in the handbook group was 18.8% (121/645) versus 38.9% (239/615) in the non-handbook group. There was a statistically significant reduction of 54.0% (95% CI 49.9-57.9) in the estimated percentage error rate when the handbook was available across all scenarios 17.9% (95% CI 14.4-22.0%) versus 38.9% (95% CI 34.2-43.9%). Almost all (97%) participants said they would want to use this cognitive aid during a real medical crisis situation.

CONCLUSION

This trial showed that by following the step-by-step, linear pathways in the handbook, clinicians more than halved their teams' rate of error, across four simulated medical crises. The handbook improves team performance and enables healthcare teams to reduce clinical error rates and thus reduce harm for patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12616001456448 registered: www.anzctr.org.au. Trial site: http://emergencyprotocols.org.au/.

Simulation Training to Improve the Ability of First-Year Doctors to Assess and Manage Deteriorating Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Many simulation courses now exist which aim to prepare first-year doctors for the task of assessing and managing potentially deteriorating patients. Despite the substantial resources required, the degree to which participants benefit from such courses, and which aspects of the simulation training are optimal for learning, remains unclear. A systematic literature search was undertaken across seven electronic databases. Inclusion criteria were that the intervention must be a simulation of a deteriorating patient scenario that would likely be experienced by first-year doctors, and that participants being first-year doctors or in their final year of medical school. Studies reporting quantitative benefits of simulation on participants' knowledge and simulator performance underwent meta-analyses. The search returned 1444 articles, of which 48 met inclusion criteria. All studies showed a benefit of simulation training, but outcomes were largely limited to self-rated or objective tests of knowledge, or simulator performance. The meta-analysis demonstrated that simulation improved participant performance by 16% as assessed by structured observation of a simulated scenario, and participant knowledge by 7% as assessed by written assessments. A mixed-methods analysis found conflicting evidence about which aspects of simulation were optimal for learning. The results of the review indicate that simulation is an important tool to improve first-year doctors' confidence, knowledge and simulator performance with regard to assessment and management of a potentially deteriorating patient. Future research should now seek to clarify the extent to which these improvements translate into clinical practice, and which aspects of simulation are best suited to achieve this.

An observational study using eye tracking to assess resident and senior anesthetists' situation awareness and visual perception in postpartum hemorrhage high fidelity simulation

Background

The postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality in the world. Human factors and especially situation awareness has primarily responsibility to explain suboptimal cares. Based on eye tracking and behavior analysis in high fidelity simulation of PPH management, the goal of this study is to identify perceptual and cognitive key parameters of the expertise.

Methods

Two groups of fifteen anesthetists (residents and experienced anesthetists) watched the beginning of a severe simulated PPH management. During this first experimental phase, situation awareness was assessed using SAGAT (Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique) questionnaire and visual behavior was analyzed with eye tracking. In the continuity of the video sequence, they have to step in the PPH situation and to provide care to the simulated patient. Performance of cares was evaluated and self-assessed as well as cognitive load.

Results

No statistical difference between the residents and experienced anesthetists was observed on performance of simulated PPH management. The mean expected practice score was 76.9 ± 13.9%). Assessment of situation awareness (65 ± 7%), cognitive load (74.4 ± 11.3%) and theoretical knowledge of PPH (52.4 ± 3.5%) were also not statistically different between the two groups. Only results of self-assessed performance (respectively 66.1 ± 16.6 and 47.0 ± 20.8 for experts and residents) and eye-tracking data revealed that experts tended to get accurate evaluation of their performance and to monitor more the blood loss of the patient. Experts have in average 8.28% more fixating points than Novices and gazed the blood loss region longer (865 ms ± 439 vs. 717 ms ± 362).

Conclusions

This study pointed out the limits of classical assessment of performance, and human factors based on questionnaires to identify expertise in simulated PPH care. A neuroscientific approach with new technology like eye tracking could provide new objective and more sensitive insights on human factors in simulated medical emergency situations.

Measuring non-technical skills of anaesthesiologists in the operating room: a systematic review of assessment tools and their measurement properties

BACKGROUND

Non-technical skills, such as communication or leadership, are integral to clinical competence in anaesthesia. There is a need for valid and reliable tools to measure anaesthetists' non-technical performance for both initial and continuing professional development. This systematic review aims to summarise the measurement properties of existing assessment tools to determine which tool is most robust.

METHODS

Embase (via OVID), Medline and Medline in Process (via OVID), and reference lists of included studies and previously published relevant systematic reviews were searched (through August 2017). Quantitative studies investigating the measurement properties of tools used to assess anaesthetists' intraoperative non-technical skills, either in a clinical or simulated environment, were included. Pairs of independent reviewers determined eligibility and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the COSMIN checklist.

RESULTS

The search yielded 978 studies, of which 14 studies describing seven tools met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 12 involved simulated crisis settings only. The measurement properties of the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills (ANTS) tool were most commonly assessed (n=9 studies), with studies of two types of validity (content, concurrent) and two types of reliability (internal consistency, interrater). Most of these studies, however, were at serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Though there are seven tools for assessing the non-technical skills of anaesthetists, only ANTS has been extensively investigated with regard to its measurement properties. ANTS appears to have acceptable validity and reliability for assessing non-technical skills of anaesthetists in both simulated and clinical settings. Future research should consider additional clinical contexts and types of measurement properties.

Simulation-based Assessment of the Management of Critical Events by Board-certified Anesthesiologists

Background

We sought to determine whether mannequin-based simulation can reliably characterize how board-certified anesthesiologists manage simulated medical emergencies. Our primary focus was to identify gaps in performance and to establish psychometric properties of the assessment methods.

Methods

A total of 263 consenting board-certified anesthesiologists participating in existing simulation-based maintenance of certification courses at one of eight simulation centers were video recorded performing simulated emergency scenarios. Each participated in two 20-min, standardized, high-fidelity simulated medical crisis scenarios, once each as primary anesthesiologist and first responder. Via a Delphi technique, an independent panel of expert anesthesiologists identified critical performance elements for each scenario. Trained, blinded anesthesiologists rated video recordings using standardized rating tools. Measures included the percentage of critical performance elements observed and holistic (one to nine ordinal scale) ratings of participant’s technical and nontechnical performance. Raters also judged whether the performance was at a level expected of a board-certified anesthesiologist.

Results

Rater reliability for most measures was good. In 284 simulated emergencies, participants were rated as successfully completing 81% (interquartile range, 75 to 90%) of the critical performance elements. The median rating of both technical and nontechnical holistic performance was five, distributed across the nine-point scale. Approximately one-quarter of participants received low holistic ratings (i.e., three or less). Higher-rated performances were associated with younger age but not with previous simulation experience or other individual characteristics. Calling for help was associated with better individual and team performance.

Conclusions

Standardized simulation-based assessment identified performance gaps informing opportunities for improvement. If a substantial proportion of experienced anesthesiologists struggle with managing medical emergencies, continuing medical education activities should be reevaluated.

Assessing anesthesiology residents' out-of-the-operating-room (OOOR) emergent airway management

BACKGROUND

At many academic institutions, anesthesiology residents are responsible for managing emergent intubations outside of the operating room (OOOR), with complications estimated to be as high as 39%. In order to create an OOOR training curriculum, we evaluated residents' familiarity with the content and correct adherence to the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Difficult Airway Algorithm (ASA DAA).

METHODS

Residents completed a pre-simulation multiple-choice survey measuring their understanding and use of the DAA. Residents then managed an emergent, difficult OOOR intubation in the simulation center, where two trained reviewers assessed performance using checklists. Post-simulation, the residents completed a survey rating their behaviors during the simulation. The primary outcome was comprehension and adherence to the DAA as assessed by survey responses and behavior in the simulation.

RESULTS

Sixty-three residents completed both surveys and the simulation. Post-survey responses indicated a shift toward decreased self-perceived familiarity with the DAA content compared to pre-survey responses. During the simulation, 22 (35%) residents were unsuccessful with intubation. Of these, 46% placed an LMA and 46% prepared for cricothyroidotomy. Nineteen residents did not attempt intubation. Of these, only 31% considered LMA placement, and 26% initiated cricothyroidotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Many anesthesiology residency training programs permit resident autonomy in managing emergent intubations OOOR. Residents self-reported familiarity with the content of and adherence to the DAA was higher than that observed during the simulation. Curriculum focused on comprehension of the DAA, as well as improving communication with higher-level physicians and specialists, may improve outcomes during OOORs.

Retesting the Hypothesis of a Clinical Randomized Controlled Trial in a Simulation Environment to Validate Anesthesia Simulation in Error Research (the VASER Study)

Background

Simulation has been used to investigate clinical questions in anesthesia, surgery, and related disciplines, but there are few data demonstrating that results apply to clinical settings. We asked “would results of a simulation-based study justify the same principal conclusions as those of a larger clinical study?”

Methods

We compared results from a randomized controlled trial in a simulated environment involving 80 cases at three centers with those from a randomized controlled trial in a clinical environment involving 1,075 cases. In both studies, we compared conventional methods of anesthetic management with the use of a multimodal system (SAFERsleep®; Safer Sleep LLC, Nashville, Tennessee) designed to reduce drug administration errors. Forty anesthesiologists each managed two simulated scenarios randomized to conventional methods or the new system. We compared the rate of error in drug administration or recording for the new system versus conventional methods in this simulated randomized controlled trial with that in the clinical randomized controlled trial (primary endpoint). Six experts were asked to indicate a clinically relevant effect size.

Results

In this simulated randomized controlled trial, mean (95% CI) rates of error per 100 administrations for the new system versus conventional groups were 6.0 (3.8 to 8.3) versus 11.6 (9.3 to 13.8; P = 0.001) compared with 9.1 (6.9 to 11.4) versus 11.6 (9.3 to 13.9) in the clinical randomized controlled trial (P = 0.045). A 10 to 30% change was considered clinically relevant. The mean (95% CI) difference in effect size was 27.0% (−7.6 to 61.6%).

Conclusions

The results of our simulated randomized controlled trial justified the same primary conclusion as those of our larger clinical randomized controlled trial, but not a finding of equivalence in effect size.

Deviation from accepted drug administration guidelines during anaesthesia in twenty highly realistic simulated cases

Deviations from accepted practice guidelines and protocols are poorly understood, yet some deviations are likely to be deliberate and carry potential for patient harm. Anaesthetic teams practice in a complex work environment and anaesthetists are unusual in that they both prescribe and administer the drugs they use, allowing scope for idiosyncratic practise. We aimed to better understand the intentions underlying deviation from accepted guidelines during drug administration in simulated cases. An observer recorded events that may have increased the risk of patient harm ('Events of Interest' [EOIs]) during 20 highly realistic simulated anaesthetic cases. In semi-structured interviews, details of EOIs were confirmed with participating anaesthetic teams, and intentions and reasoning underlying the confirmed deviations were discussed. Confirmed details of EOIs were tabulated and we undertook qualitative analysis of interview transcripts. Twenty-four EOIs (69% of 35 recorded) were judged by participants to carry potential for patient harm, and 12 (34%) were judged to be deviations from accepted guidelines (including one drug administration error). Underlying reasons for deviations included a strong sense of clinical autonomy, poor clinical relevance and a lack of evidence for guidelines, ingrained habits learnt in early training, and the influence of peers. Guidelines are important in clinical practice, yet self-identified deviation from accepted guidelines was common in our results, and all but one of these events was judged to carry potential for patient harm. A better understanding of the reasons underlying deviation from accepted guidelines is essential to the design of more effective guidelines and to achieving compliance.

Exploring the relationship between anaesthesiologists' non-technical and technical skills

BACKGROUND

A combination of non-technical skills (NTS) and technical skills (TS) is crucial for anaesthetic patient management. However, a deeper understanding of the relationship between these two skills remains to be explored. We investigated the characteristics of trainee anaesthesiologists' NTS and TS in a simulated unexpected difficult airway management scenario.

METHODS

A mixed-method approach was used to explore the relationship between NTS and TS in 25 videos of 2nd year trainee anaesthesiologists managing a simulated difficult airway scenario. The videos were assessed using the customised version of the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills System, ANTSdk, and an adapted TS checklist for calculating the correlation between NTS and TS. Written descriptions of the observed NTS were analysed using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

The correlation between the NTS and the TS ratings was 0.106 (two-tailed significance of 0.613). Inter-rater reliability was substantial. Themes characterising good NTS included a systematic approach, planning and communicating decisions as well as responding to the evolving situation. A list of desirable, concrete NTS for the specific airway management situation was generated.

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates that anaesthesiologist trainees' NTS and TS were not correlated in this setting, but rather intertwined and how the interplay of NTS and TS can impact patient management. Themes describing the characteristics of NTS and a list of desirable, concrete NTS were developed to aid the understanding, training and use of NTS.

Practice improvements based on participation in simulation for the maintenance of certification in anesthesiology program

BACKGROUND

This study describes anesthesiologists' practice improvements undertaken during the first 3 yr of simulation activities for the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program.

METHODS

A stratified sampling of 3 yr (2010-2012) of participants' practice improvement plans was coded, categorized, and analyzed.

RESULTS

Using the sampling scheme, 634 of 1,275 participants in Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program simulation courses were evaluated from the following practice settings: 41% (262) academic, 54% (339) community, and 5% (33) military/other. A total of 1,982 plans were analyzed for completion, target audience, and topic. On follow-up, 79% (1,558) were fully completed, 16% (310) were partially completed, and 6% (114) were not completed within the 90-day reporting period. Plans targeted the reporting individual (89% of plans) and others (78% of plans): anesthesia providers (50%), non-anesthesia physicians (16%), and non-anesthesia non-physician providers (26%). From the plans, 2,453 improvements were categorized as work environment or systems changes (33% of improvements), teamwork skills (30%), personal knowledge (29%), handoff (4%), procedural skills (3%), or patient communication (1%). The median word count was 63 (interquartile range, 30 to 126) for each participant's combined plans and 147 (interquartile range, 52 to 257) for improvement follow-up reports.

CONCLUSIONS

After making a commitment to change, 94% of anesthesiologists participating in a Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program simulation course successfully implemented some or all of their planned practice improvements. This compares favorably to rates in other studies. Simulation experiences stimulate active learning and motivate personal and collaborative practice improvement changes. Further evaluation will assess the impact of the improvements and further refine the program.

The relationship between intraoperative teamwork and management skills in patient care

BACKGROUND

Optimal team performance in the operating room (OR) requires a combination of interactions among OR professionals and adherence to clinical guidelines. Theoretically, it is possible that OR teams could communicate very well but fail to follow acceptable standards of patient care and vice versa. OR simulations offer an ideal research environment to study this relationship. The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between ratings of OR teamwork and communication with adherence to patient care guidelines in a simulated scenarios of malignant hyperthermia (MH).

METHODS

An interprofessional research team (2 anesthesiologists, 1 surgeon, an OR nurse, and a social scientist) reviewed videos of 5 intraoperative teams managing a simulated patient who manifested MH while undergoing general anesthesia for an epigastric herniorraphy in a high-fidelity, in situ OR. Participant teams consisted of 2 residents from anesthesiology, 1 from surgery, 1 OR nurse, and 1 certified surgical technician. Teamwork and communication were assessed with 4 published tools: Anesthesiologists' Non-Technical Skills (ANTS), Scrub Practitioners List of Intra-operative Non-Technical Skills (SPLINTS), Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS), and Objective Teamwork Assessment System (OTAS). We developed an evidence-based MH checklist to assess overall patient care.

RESULTS

Interrater agreement for teamwork tools was moderate. Average rater agreement was 0.51 For ANTS, 0.67 for SPLINTS, 0.51 for NOTSS, and 0.70 for OTAS. Observer agreement for the MH checklist was high (0.88). Correlations between teamwork and MH checklist were not significant. Teams were different in percent of the MH actions taken (range, 50-91%; P = .006).

CONCLUSION

In this pilot study, intraoperative teamwork and communication were not related to overall patient care management. Separating nontechnical and technical skills when teaching OR teamwork is artificial and may even be damaging, because such an approach could produce teams with excellent communication skills as they unsuccessfully manage the patient. OR simulations offer a unique opportunity to research how to best integrate both of these domains to improve patient care.

Read-back improves information transfer in simulated clinical crises

BACKGROUND

Safe and effective healthcare is frustrated by failures in communication. Repeating back important information (read-back) is thought to enhance the effectiveness of communication across many industries. However, formal communication protocols are uncommon in healthcare teams.

AIMS

We aimed to quantify the effect of read-back on the transfer of information between members of a healthcare team during a simulated clinical crisis. We hypothesised that reading back information provided by other team members would result in better knowledge of that information by the receiver than verbal response without read-back or no verbal response.

METHOD

Postanaesthesia care unit nurses and anaesthetic assistants were given clinically relevant items of information at the start of 88 simulations. A clinical crisis prompted calling an anaesthetist, with no prior knowledge of the patient. Using video recordings of the simulations, we noted each time a piece of information was mentioned to the anaesthetist. Their response was coded as read-back, verbal response without read-back or no verbal response.

RESULTS

If the anaesthetists read back the item of information, or otherwise verbally responded, they were, respectively, 8.27 (p<0.001) or 3.16 (p=0.03) times more likely to know the information compared with no verbal response.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that training healthcare teams to use read-back techniques could increase information transfer between team members with the potential for improved patient safety. More work is needed to confirm these findings.