Assessment of three methods for removing massive air in a cardiopulmonary bypass circuit: simulation-based multi-discipline training in West China Hospital
-
Published:2018-10-19
Issue:3
Volume:34
Page:203-210
-
ISSN:0267-6591
-
Container-title:Perfusion
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Perfusion
Author:
Liu Ting1,
Qin Zhen1,
Luo Ming1,
Tan Zhao-Xia1,
Xiong Ji-Yue1,
Gu Gang-Jian1,
Yu Xiang1,
Li Qi1,
Zhou Rong-Hua1ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
Abstract
Background and Objective: A multi-discipline cardiac and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) team simulation scenario was established to compare three different de-airing approaches dealing with massive air embolism in CPB, so as to formulate a standardized procedure to handle this adverse acute event more proficiently and ensure clinical safety. Method: A simulation-based clinical CPB massive air embolism scenario was developed by a cardiac and CPB team. Study Objects: Five licensed perfusionists and five CPB trainees were matched randomly into five pairs. Each pair would simulate the three different de-airing approaches separately as followed: (1) Conventional Method: arterial line filter (ALF) de-airing purge line and oxygenator self-recirculation bypass were used to de-air; (2) Arterial-Venous Loop (A-V Loop) Method: surgeons reconnected the arterial and venous lines to de-air by restoring the original priming A-V loop configuration; (3) Isolation of the ALF Method: this ensures de-bubbling of the CPB circuit, but bypasses the ALF function. Assessment Criteria: (1) Times to recovery (duration of the circulation suspension); (2) Subjective evaluation of skill and non-skill performances. Results: As to times to recovery, the Conventional Method group took 290.6 s ± 36.2, the A-V Loop Method group took 196.8 s ± 52.0 and the Isolation of ALF group took 99.4 s ± 15.1. The statistical difference is significant among the three groups (p<0.01). The subjective evaluation of training performance indicates that this simulation-based training is effective in assessing both skill and non-skill abilities. Conclusion: CPB simulation-based training was effective in comparing de-airing strategies and can instruct perfusion practices how to optimize techniques. For well-trained, multi-discipline cardiac teams, the A-V Loop Method is highly efficient and reliable in managing CPB massive air embolism. For cardiac teams that do not have this sophisticated training, the Isolation of ALF Method should be their alternative option.
Funder
Laboratory Project of Educational Innovation in Sichuan University in 2016
Medical Educational Research Grant from Medical Education Committee of Chinese Medical Association and Medical Education Association of High Education Society of China in 2016
Research and Practice Project of Educational Innovation in the West China School of Medicine in 2016
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Subject
Advanced and Specialised Nursing,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Safety Research,Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献