Carleen R Spitzer, Kyle R Stinehart, Will C Jensen, Amanda R Start
{"title":"Improving Resident Comfort with Central Venous Catheter Supervision: Use of an Error Management Training Approach.","authors":"Carleen R Spitzer, Kyle R Stinehart, Will C Jensen, Amanda R Start","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S513443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Simulation is a well-established component of central venous catheter (CVC) training. However, there is little published regarding how to train residents to supervise CVC insertion.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We describe a curriculum designed to help trainees identify potential procedural errors and improve their comfort with supervising CVC insertion.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a one-group, pre-post-posttest study. All participants completed a pre-simulation assessment (Time 1) that evaluated residents' ability to identify potential complications with CVC insertion and their procedural completion and procedural supervision comfort. Residents then participated in a simulation in which they supervised a mock proceduralist insert a CVC and commit five pre-specified errors. Participants completed the same comfort assessment immediately following the simulation (Time 2) and repeat knowledge and comfort assessments five months later (Time 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-seven interns participated in the study. Relative to Time 1 (M = 3.00, SD = 1.02), interns were significantly more comfortable supervising CVC insertion at Time 2 (M = 3.75, SD = 0.85) and at Time 3 (M = 4.08, SD = 0.58).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We describe a simulation designed to help residents identify errors when supervising CVC insertion. Due to a poor survey response rate, no comparisons between pre- and post-simulation error identification could be determined. However, following our CVC supervisor simulation, participants reported immediate and sustained increases in their comfort supervising CVC placement.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"16 ","pages":"795-800"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12091231/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S513443","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Simulation is a well-established component of central venous catheter (CVC) training. However, there is little published regarding how to train residents to supervise CVC insertion.
Purpose: We describe a curriculum designed to help trainees identify potential procedural errors and improve their comfort with supervising CVC insertion.
Patients and methods: We conducted a one-group, pre-post-posttest study. All participants completed a pre-simulation assessment (Time 1) that evaluated residents' ability to identify potential complications with CVC insertion and their procedural completion and procedural supervision comfort. Residents then participated in a simulation in which they supervised a mock proceduralist insert a CVC and commit five pre-specified errors. Participants completed the same comfort assessment immediately following the simulation (Time 2) and repeat knowledge and comfort assessments five months later (Time 3).
Results: Forty-seven interns participated in the study. Relative to Time 1 (M = 3.00, SD = 1.02), interns were significantly more comfortable supervising CVC insertion at Time 2 (M = 3.75, SD = 0.85) and at Time 3 (M = 4.08, SD = 0.58).
Conclusion: We describe a simulation designed to help residents identify errors when supervising CVC insertion. Due to a poor survey response rate, no comparisons between pre- and post-simulation error identification could be determined. However, following our CVC supervisor simulation, participants reported immediate and sustained increases in their comfort supervising CVC placement.