Emergency Airway Management: A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Cognitive Aids in Improving Outcomes and Provider Performance.

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Raisa Chowdhury, Ostap Orishchak, Marco A Mascarella, Bshair Aldriweesh, Mohammed K Alnoury, Guillaume Bousquet-Dion, Jeffrey Yeung, Lily Ha-Nam P Nguyen
{"title":"Emergency Airway Management: A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Cognitive Aids in Improving Outcomes and Provider Performance.","authors":"Raisa Chowdhury, Ostap Orishchak, Marco A Mascarella, Bshair Aldriweesh, Mohammed K Alnoury, Guillaume Bousquet-Dion, Jeffrey Yeung, Lily Ha-Nam P Nguyen","doi":"10.3390/clinpract15010013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Emergency airway management is a critical skill for healthcare professionals, particularly in life-threatening situations like \"cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate\" (CICO) scenarios. Errors and delays in airway management can lead to adverse outcomes, including hypoxia and death. Cognitive aids, such as checklists and algorithms, have been proposed as tools to improve decision-making, procedural competency, and non-technical skills in these high-stakes environments. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive aids in enhancing emergency airway management skills among health professionals and trainees. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted from February to March 2024. Studies examining the use of cognitive aids, such as the Vortex method, the ASA difficult airway algorithm, and visual airway aids, in emergency airway scenarios were included. Outcomes assessed included decision-making speed, procedural success rates, and non-technical skills. Data were extracted using standardized protocols, and the quality of included studies was appraised. <b>Results:</b> Five studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing randomized controlled trials, controlled studies, and mixed-methods research. Cognitive aids improved decision-making times (reduced by 44.6 s), increased procedural success rates, and enhanced non-technical skills such as teamwork and crisis management. Participants reported reduced anxiety and improved confidence levels (self-efficacy scores increased by 1.9 points). The Vortex method and visual cognitive aids demonstrated particular effectiveness in simulated scenarios. <b>Conclusions:</b> Cognitive aids significantly enhance emergency airway management skills, improving performance, reducing errors, and increasing provider confidence. Integrating cognitive aids into training programs has the potential to improve patient safety and outcomes. Further research is needed to validate these findings in clinical settings and optimize cognitive aid design and implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":45306,"journal":{"name":"Clinics and Practice","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11764273/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract15010013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Emergency airway management is a critical skill for healthcare professionals, particularly in life-threatening situations like "cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" (CICO) scenarios. Errors and delays in airway management can lead to adverse outcomes, including hypoxia and death. Cognitive aids, such as checklists and algorithms, have been proposed as tools to improve decision-making, procedural competency, and non-technical skills in these high-stakes environments. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive aids in enhancing emergency airway management skills among health professionals and trainees. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted from February to March 2024. Studies examining the use of cognitive aids, such as the Vortex method, the ASA difficult airway algorithm, and visual airway aids, in emergency airway scenarios were included. Outcomes assessed included decision-making speed, procedural success rates, and non-technical skills. Data were extracted using standardized protocols, and the quality of included studies was appraised. Results: Five studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing randomized controlled trials, controlled studies, and mixed-methods research. Cognitive aids improved decision-making times (reduced by 44.6 s), increased procedural success rates, and enhanced non-technical skills such as teamwork and crisis management. Participants reported reduced anxiety and improved confidence levels (self-efficacy scores increased by 1.9 points). The Vortex method and visual cognitive aids demonstrated particular effectiveness in simulated scenarios. Conclusions: Cognitive aids significantly enhance emergency airway management skills, improving performance, reducing errors, and increasing provider confidence. Integrating cognitive aids into training programs has the potential to improve patient safety and outcomes. Further research is needed to validate these findings in clinical settings and optimize cognitive aid design and implementation.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinics and Practice
Clinics and Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信