Emergency Information Forms for Children With Medical Complexity: A Simulation Study

Author:

Abraham George1,Fehr James2,Ahmad Fahd1,Jeffe Donna B.3,Copper Tara1,Yu Feliciano4,White Andrew J.5,Auerbach Marc6,Schnadower David1

Affiliation:

1. Divisions of Emergency Medicine,

2. Anesthesiology and Critical Care, and

3. General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, and

4. Divisions of Hospitalist Medicine, and

5. Rheumatology, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri; and

6. Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Departments of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Emergency information forms (EIFs) have been proposed to provide critical information for optimal care of children with medical complexity (CMC) during emergencies; however, their impact has not been studied. The objective of this study was to measure the impact and utility of EIFs in simulated scenarios of CMC during medical emergencies. METHODS: Twenty-four providers (12 junior, 12 experienced) performed 4 simulations of CMC, where access to an EIF was block randomized by group. Scenario-specific critical action checklists and consequential pathways were developed by content experts in simulation and pediatric subspecialists. Scenarios ended when all critical actions were completed or after 10 minutes, whichever came first. Two reviewers independently evaluated the video-recorded performances and calculated scenario-specific critical action scores. Performance in scenarios with and without an EIF was compared with Pearson’s χ2 and Mann–Whitney U tests. Interrater reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation. Each provider rated the utility of EIFs via exit questionnaires. RESULTS: The median critical action score in scenarios with EIFs was 84.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.7%–94.1%) versus 12.5% (95% CI, 10.5%–35.3%) in scenarios without an EIF (P < .001); time to completion of scenarios was shorter (6.9 minutes [interquartile range 5.8–10 minutes] vs 10 minutes), and complication rates were lower (30% [95% CI, 17.4%–46.3%] vs 100% [95% CI, 92.2%–100%]) with EIFs, independent of provider experience. Interrater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation = 0.979). All providers strongly agreed that EIFs can improve clinical outcomes for CMC. CONCLUSIONS: Using simulated scenarios of CMC, providers’ performance was superior with an EIF. Clinicians evaluated the utility of EIFs very highly.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3