Multidisciplinary in-situ simulation to evaluate a rare but high-risk process at a level 1 trauma centre: the “Mega-Sim” approach

Is in situ simulation in emergency medicine safe? A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the available evidence regarding the safety of in situ simulation (ISS) in the emergency department (ED).

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Original articles published before March 2021 were included if they investigated the use of ISS in the field of emergency medicine.

INFORMATION SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and Web of Science.

RESULTS

A total of 4077 records were identified by our search strategy and 2476 abstracts were screened. One hundred and thirty full articles were reviewed and 81 full articles were included. Only 33 studies (40%) assessed safety-related issues, among which 11 chose a safety-related primary outcome. Latent safety threats (LSTs) assessment was conducted in 24 studies (30%) and the cancellation rate was described in 9 studies (11%). The possible negative impact of ISS on real ED patients was assessed in two studies (2.5%), through a questionnaire and not through patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Most studies use ISS for systems-based or education-based applications. Patient safety during ISS is often evaluated in the context of identifying or mitigating LSTs and rarely on the potential impact and risks to patients simultaneously receiving care in the ED. Our scoping review identified knowledge gaps related to the safe conduct of ISS in the ED, which may warrant further investigation.

The clock is ticking: using in situ simulation to improve time to blood administration for bleeding trauma patients

INTRODUCTION

Massive hemorrhage protocols are widely used to facilitate the administration of blood components to bleeding trauma patients. Delays in this process are associated with worse patient outcomes. We used in situ simulation as a novel and iterative quality improvement technique to reduce the mean time between massive hemorrhage protocol activation and blood administration during actual trauma resuscitations.

METHODS

We completed monthly, risk-informed unannounced in situ trauma simulations at a Canadian Level 1 trauma centre. We identified three major latent safety threats: (1) massive hemorrhage protocol activation; (2) transport of blood components; and (3) situational awareness of team members. Process improvements for each latent safety threats were tested and implemented during subsequent in situ simulation sessions. We evaluated the effect of this simulation-based intervention on the care of patients before, during and after the intervention. Demographic, clinical and massive hemorrhage protocol data were collected. The primary outcome was mean time between massive hemorrhage protocol activation and blood administration during actual trauma resuscitations as analyzed using a two-sample t test.

RESULTS

Each group was similar in demographic and injury characteristics. The time from massive hemorrhage protocol activation to blood administration decreased from 11.6 min pre-intervention to 9.1 min post-intervention. This represented a significant reduction (2.5 min, 95% confidence interval, 0.03-5.08) following the in situ simulation-based quality improvement intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive, in situ simulation-based quality improvement project was associated with a significant reduction in the mean time between massive hemorrhage protocol activation and blood administration among injured patients. In situ simulation represents a novel approach to the identification and mitigation of latent safety threats during massive hemorrhage protocol activation.

[The (severely) injured pregnant patient from the perspective of trauma surgery]

BACKGROUND

Trauma is the leading cause for nonpregnancy-linked maternal mortality in pregnant women, even though the exact incidence for accidents in pregnancy is unknown. Trauma management concepts applied for nonpregnant adult patients are just as valid for injured and severely injured pregnant women but in addition trauma management has to consider the unique physiological and pathophysiological conditions for a favorable maternal and fetal outcome.

OBJECTIVE

Overview of current data about the epidemiology, injury mechanisms, maternal and fetal outcome and recommendations on the management of injured pregnant women based on a systematic literature search.

RESULTS

Currently, there is no evidence indicating an association between maternal injury severity, the physiological condition and the fetal outcome. Practice guidelines for trauma management in pregnancy recommend prioritization of maternal treatment and resuscitation for optimal initial treatment of the fetus. The current recommendations for trauma room management in pregnancy, surgical treatment, including damage control surgery, are based on weak evidence.

CONCLUSION

The examination, stabilization and treatment of injured pregnant women has priority for fetal survival and outcome. The management of severe trauma in pregnancy requires a multidisciplinary expertise and team approach consisting of surgeons, anesthetists, radiologists, obstetricians and neonatologists, so that for a severely injured gravida, the decision for admission to designated trauma centers is already preclinically made. The principles of management and treatment of severely injured pregnant women should adhere to the treatment principles of nonpregnant trauma victims.

Pregnant trauma patients may be at increased risk of mortality compared to nonpregnant women of reproductive age: trends and outcomes over 10 years at a level I trauma center

Background:

Pregnancy has been identified as a risk factor for poor outcomes after traumatic injury, but prior outcome analyses are conflicting and dated. We sought to examine outcomes in a contemporary cohort.

Methods:

Retrospective cohort analysis at a level I trauma center’s institutional registry from 2009 to 2018, with comparison to population-level demographic trends in women of reproductive age and pregnancy prevalence. Unadjusted cohorts of pregnant versus nonpregnant trauma patients were compared. Pregnant patients then were matched on age, mechanism of injury, year, and injury severity score with nonpregnant controls for adjusted analysis with a primary outcome of maternal mortality.

Results:

Despite declining birth and pregnancy rates in the population, pregnant women comprised a stable 5.3% of female trauma patients of reproductive age without decline over the study period (p = 0.53). Compared with nonpregnant women, pregnant trauma patients had a lower injury severity score (1 [1–5] vs 5 [1–10] p < 0.0001) and a shorter length of stay (1 [1–2] vs 1 [1–4] p = 0.04), were less likely to have CT imaging (48.8% vs 67.4%, p < 0.0001) and more likely to be admitted (89.3% vs 79.2%, p = 0.003). Positive toxicology screens were less prevalent in pregnant women, but only for ethanol (5.4% vs 31.4%, p < 0.0001); there was no difference in rates of cannabis, opiates, or cocaine. After matching to adjust for age, year, mechanism of injury, and injury severity score, mortality occurred significantly more frequently in the pregnant cohort (2.1% vs 0.2%, OR = 13.5 [1.39–130.9], p = 0.02).

Conclusion:

Pregnant trauma patients have not declined in our population despite population-level declines in pregnancy. After adjusting for lower injury severity, pregnant women were at substantially greater risk of mortality. This supports ongoing concern for pregnant trauma patients as a vulnerable population. Further efforts should optimize systems of care to maximize the chances of rescue for both mother and fetus.

Raising rare disease awareness using red flags, role play simulation and patient educators: results of a novel educational workshop on Raynaud phenomenon and systemic sclerosis

BACKGROUND

As lack of awareness of rare diseases (RDs) among healthcare professionals results in delayed diagnoses, there is a need for a more efficient approach to RD training during academic education. We designed an experimental workshop that used role-play simulation with patient educators and focused on teaching "red flags" that should raise the suspicion of an RD when faced with a patient with frequently encountered symptoms. Our objective was to report our experience, and to assess the improvement in learners' knowledge and the satisfaction levels of the participants.

RESULTS

The workshop consisted of 2 simulated consultations that both started with the same frequent symptom (Raynaud phenomenon, RP) but led to different diagnoses: a frequent condition (idiopathic RP) and an RD (systemic sclerosis, SSc). In the second simulated consultation, the role of the patient was played by a patient educator with SSc. By juxtaposing 2 seemingly similar situations, the training particularly highlighted the elements that help differentiate SSc from idiopathic RP. When answering a clinical case exam about RP and SSc, students that had participated in the workshop had a higher mean mark than those who had not (14 ± 3.7 vs 9.6 ± 5.5 points out of 20, p = 0.001). Participants mostly felt "very satisfied" with this training (94%), and "more comfortable" about managing idiopathic RP and SSc (100%). They considered the workshop "not very stressful" and "very formative" (both 71%). When asked about the strengths of this training, they mentioned the benefits of being put in an immersive situation, allowing a better acquisition of practical skills and a more interactive exchange with teachers, as well as the confrontation with a real patient, leading to a better retention of semiological findings and associating a relational component with this experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Through the use of innovative educational methods, such as role-play simulation and patient educators, and by focusing on teaching "red flags", our workshop successfully improved RP and SSc learning in a way that satisfied students. By modifying the workshop's scenarios, its template can readily be applied to other clinical situations, making it an interesting tool to teach other RDs.