An experimental study on the impact of clinical interruptions on simulated trainee performances of central venous catheterization

Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation vs Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Labor Cost Model

INTRODUCTION

Despite evidence suggesting that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is faster and non-inferior for confirming position and excluding pneumothorax after central venous catheter (CVC) placement compared to traditional radiography, millions of chest radiographs (CXR) are performed annually for this purpose. Whether the use of POCUS results in cost savings compared to CXR is less clear but could represent a relative advantage in implementation efforts. Our objective in this study was to evaluate the labor cost difference for POCUS-guided vs CXR-guided CVC position confirmation practices.

METHODS

We developed a model to evaluate the per patient difference in labor cost between POCUS-guided vs CXR-guided CVC confirmation at our local urban, tertiary academic institution. We used internal cost data from our institution to populate the variables in our model.

RESULTS

The estimated labor cost per patient was $18.48 using CXR compared to $14.66 for POCUS, resulting in a net direct cost savings of $3.82 (21%) per patient using POCUS for CVC confirmation.

CONCLUSION

In this study comparing the labor costs of two approaches for CVC confirmation, the more efficient alternative (POCUS-guided) is not more expensive than traditional CXR. Performing an economic analysis framed in terms of labor costs and work efficiency may influence stakeholders and facilitate earlier adoption of POCUS for CVC confirmation.

Learning Interrupted: Educational Impact of Interruptions on Surgical Residents

OBJECTIVE

The complex workflow of surgical residents in the workplace-based learning environment makes interruptions an unavoidable aspect of clinical work. Interruptions have been shown to affect cognitive load, surgical performance, and medical error. The purpose of this study was to describe the effects of interruptions on surgical resident education.

DESIGN

Junior residents were observed by 2 trained observers using time-motion methodology between September 2018-August 2019. Interruptions were identified and coded retroactively based on predefined criteria. We captured key features of interruptions including frequency, duration, task interrupted, outcome, and learner perceived educational value.

SETTING

This study took place at London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario, Canada, a tertiary level academic health care center associated with the Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry at Western University.

PARTICIPANTS

Junior residents on a General Surgery service were eligible for participation. Participation was voluntary. 8 residents were observed over 24 clinical periods.

RESULTS

A total of 278.2 hours of resident workflow were observed, and 229 interruptions were recorded. Interruptions account for 57.9 minutes/day of a surgical resident (SD = 60.7). Interruptions occur at a frequency of 0.82 interruptions/hour. Disruptive interruptions, that interfere with the continuation or completion of the original task, occur at a frequency of 0.11 interruptions/hour. Disruptive interruptions occurred at a higher frequency of 0.34 interruptions/hour during periods of feedback, coaching and informal teaching.

DISCUSSION

We observed that tasks of higher learner perceived educational value are often interrupted by tasks of lower learner perceived education value. Valuable educational experiences such as feedback, coaching and informal teaching are interrupted at a greater rate and experience disruptions at a disproportionate rate. We identified feedback, coaching and informal teaching as an education task vulnerable to disruptive interruptions that would benefit from interventions targeted toward preventing interruption. Suggested interventions include "formalizing" feedback, coaching and informal teaching.

Évaluation des éléments perturbateurs lors de réanimation cardiopulmonaire aux urgences

Introduction : La simulation est un outil d’enseignement en médecine qui a montré un bénéfice entre autres pour l’apprentissage de la réanimation cardiopulmonaire (RCP). Cependant, la RCP simulée peut différer grandement de la RCP en conditions réelles. Le but de cette étude exploratoire était d’identifier des éléments perturbateurs susceptibles d’intervenir lors d’une RCP.

Méthodes : Il s’agit d’une étude transversale anonyme par questionnaire distribué par courrier électronique aux urgentistes de cinq services d’urgences à Paris. Le questionnaire comprenait des questions sur les éléments perturbateurs lors d’une RCP. D’autres questions ont exploré les différences perçues entre la RCP simulée et la RCP réelle. Les résultats sont exprimés sous forme de pourcentages et moyennes (± écart-type).

Résultats : Sur 100 médecins interrogés, 43 (43 %) réponses ont été analysées. Cinquante-trois pour cent étaient des femmes âgées en moyenne de 32 ± 3 ans. Les éléments perturbateurs de la RCP dans la vie réelle étaient principalement les interruptions de tâches provenant du personnel non médical (n = 16 ; 37 %), de la famille du patient (n = 5 ; 12 %), des autres spécialistes (n = 5 ; 12 %) et des appels téléphoniques (n = 2 ; 5 %). La saturation du flux patient des urgences (n = 12 ; 28 %) a également été mentionnée comme perturbateur. Les médecins ont aussi déclaré que certaines compétences techniques et non techniques étaient plus difficiles à réaliser dans la vie réelle que lors de simulations.

Conclusion : Cette étude exploratoire a permis d’identifier des éléments perturbateurs rencontrés dans des cas réels de RCP qui pourront être intégrés aux sessions de simulation afin d’en augmenter le réalisme.

Using clinical simulation to study how to improve quality and safety in healthcare

Simulation can offer researchers access to events that can otherwise not be directly observed, and in a safe and controlled environment. How to use simulation for the study of how to improve the quality and safety of healthcare remains underexplored, however. We offer an overview of simulation-based research (SBR) in this context. Building on theory and examples, we show how SBR can be deployed and which study designs it may support. We discuss the challenges of simulation for healthcare improvement research and how they can be tackled. We conclude that using simulation in the study of healthcare improvement is a promising approach that could usefully complement established research methods.

Interruptions, Unreasonable Tasks, and Quality-Threatening Time Pressure in Home Care: Linked to Attention Deficits and Slips, Trips, and Falls

BACKGROUND

In industrial countries, home care of community dwelling elderly people is rapidly growing. Frequent injuries in home caregivers result from slips, trips, and falls (STFs). The current study tests attentional cognitive failure to mediate the association between work stressors and STFs.

METHODS

A sample of 125 home caregivers participated in a questionnaire study and reported work interruptions, unreasonable tasks, quality-threatening time pressure, conscientiousness, attentional cognitive failures, and STFs.

RESULTS

In structural equation modeling, the mediation model was shown to fit empirical data. Indirect paths with attentional cognitive failures as the link between work stressors and STF were all significant in bootstrapping tests. An alternative accident-prone person model, that suggests individual differences in conscientiousness to predict attentional cognitive failures that predict more frequent work stressors and STFs, showed no significant paths between work conditions and STFs.

CONCLUSION

To prevent occupational injury, work should be redesigned to reduce work interruptions, unreasonable tasks, and quality-threatening time pressure in home care.

Task errors by emergency physicians are associated with interruptions, multitasking, fatigue and working memory capacity: a prospective, direct observation study

BACKGROUND

Interruptions and multitasking have been demonstrated in experimental studies to reduce individuals' task performance. These behaviours are frequently used by clinicians in high-workload, dynamic clinical environments, yet their effects have rarely been studied.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative contributions of interruptions and multitasking by emergency physicians to prescribing errors.

METHODS

36 emergency physicians were shadowed over 120 hours. All tasks, interruptions and instances of multitasking were recorded. Physicians' working memory capacity (WMC) and preference for multitasking were assessed using the Operation Span Task (OSPAN) and Inventory of Polychronic Values. Following observation, physicians were asked about their sleep in the previous 24 hours. Prescribing errors were used as a measure of task performance. We performed multivariate analysis of prescribing error rates to determine associations with interruptions and multitasking, also considering physician seniority, age, psychometric measures, workload and sleep.

RESULTS

Physicians experienced 7.9 interruptions/hour. 28 clinicians were observed prescribing 239 medication orders which contained 208 prescribing errors. While prescribing, clinicians were interrupted 9.4 times/hour. Error rates increased significantly if physicians were interrupted (rate ratio (RR) 2.82; 95% CI 1.23 to 6.49) or multitasked (RR 1.86; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.56) while prescribing. Having below-average sleep showed a >15-fold increase in clinical error rate (RR 16.44; 95% CI 4.84 to 55.81). WMC was protective against errors; for every 10-point increase on the 75-point OSPAN, a 19% decrease in prescribing errors was observed. There was no effect of polychronicity, workload, physician gender or above-average sleep on error rates.

CONCLUSION

Interruptions, multitasking and poor sleep were associated with significantly increased rates of prescribing errors among emergency physicians. WMC mitigated the negative influence of these factors to an extent. These results confirm experimental findings in other fields and raise questions about the acceptability of the high rates of multitasking and interruption in clinical environments.