Understanding the Cognitive Demands, Skills, and Assessment Approaches for Endotracheal Intubation: Cognitive Task Analysis.

Taylor Kunkes, Basiel Makled, Jack Norfleet, Steven Schwaitzberg, Lora Cavuoto
{"title":"Understanding the Cognitive Demands, Skills, and Assessment Approaches for Endotracheal Intubation: Cognitive Task Analysis.","authors":"Taylor Kunkes, Basiel Makled, Jack Norfleet, Steven Schwaitzberg, Lora Cavuoto","doi":"10.2196/34522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proper airway management is an essential skill for hospital personnel and rescue services to learn, as it is a priority for the care of patients who are critically ill. It is essential that providers be properly trained and competent in performing endotracheal intubation (ETI), a widely used technique for airway management. Several metrics have been created to measure competence in the ETI procedure. However, there is still a need to improve ETI training and evaluation, including a focus on collaborative research across medical specialties, to establish greater competence-based training and assessments. Training and evaluating ETI should also incorporate modern, evidence-based procedural training methodologies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to use the cognitive task analysis (CTA) framework to identify the cognitive demands and skills needed to proficiently perform a task, elucidate differences between novice and expert performance, and provide an understanding of the workload associated with a task. The CTA framework was applied to ETI to capture a broad view of task and training requirements from the perspective of multiple medical specialties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A CTA interview was developed based on previous research into the tasks and evaluation methods of ETI. A total of 6 experts from across multiple medical specialties were interviewed to capture the cognitive skills required to complete this task. Interviews were coded for main themes, subthemes in each category, and differences among specialties. These findings were compiled into a skills tree to identify the training needs and cognitive requirements of each task.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CTA revealed that consistency in equipment setup and planning, through talk or think-aloud methods, is critical to successfully mastering ETI. These factors allow the providers to avoid errors due to patient characteristics and environmental factors. Variation among specialties derived primarily from the environment in which ETI is performed, subsequent treatment plans, and available resources. Anesthesiology typically represented the most ideal cases with a large potential for training, whereas paramedics faced the greatest number of constraints based on the environment and available equipment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the skills tree cannot perfectly capture the complexity and detail of all potential cases, it provided insight into the nuanced skills and training techniques used to prepare novices for the variability they may find in practice. Importantly, the CTA identified ways in which challenges faced by novices may be overcome and how this training can be applied to future cases. By making these implicit skills and points of variation explicit, they can be better translated into teachable details. These findings are consistent with previous studies looking at developing improved assessment metrics for ETI and expanding upon their work by delving into methods of feedback and strategies to assist novices.</p>","PeriodicalId":73557,"journal":{"name":"JMIR perioperative medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"e34522"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9073620/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR perioperative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/34522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Proper airway management is an essential skill for hospital personnel and rescue services to learn, as it is a priority for the care of patients who are critically ill. It is essential that providers be properly trained and competent in performing endotracheal intubation (ETI), a widely used technique for airway management. Several metrics have been created to measure competence in the ETI procedure. However, there is still a need to improve ETI training and evaluation, including a focus on collaborative research across medical specialties, to establish greater competence-based training and assessments. Training and evaluating ETI should also incorporate modern, evidence-based procedural training methodologies.

Objective: This study aims to use the cognitive task analysis (CTA) framework to identify the cognitive demands and skills needed to proficiently perform a task, elucidate differences between novice and expert performance, and provide an understanding of the workload associated with a task. The CTA framework was applied to ETI to capture a broad view of task and training requirements from the perspective of multiple medical specialties.

Methods: A CTA interview was developed based on previous research into the tasks and evaluation methods of ETI. A total of 6 experts from across multiple medical specialties were interviewed to capture the cognitive skills required to complete this task. Interviews were coded for main themes, subthemes in each category, and differences among specialties. These findings were compiled into a skills tree to identify the training needs and cognitive requirements of each task.

Results: The CTA revealed that consistency in equipment setup and planning, through talk or think-aloud methods, is critical to successfully mastering ETI. These factors allow the providers to avoid errors due to patient characteristics and environmental factors. Variation among specialties derived primarily from the environment in which ETI is performed, subsequent treatment plans, and available resources. Anesthesiology typically represented the most ideal cases with a large potential for training, whereas paramedics faced the greatest number of constraints based on the environment and available equipment.

Conclusions: Although the skills tree cannot perfectly capture the complexity and detail of all potential cases, it provided insight into the nuanced skills and training techniques used to prepare novices for the variability they may find in practice. Importantly, the CTA identified ways in which challenges faced by novices may be overcome and how this training can be applied to future cases. By making these implicit skills and points of variation explicit, they can be better translated into teachable details. These findings are consistent with previous studies looking at developing improved assessment metrics for ETI and expanding upon their work by delving into methods of feedback and strategies to assist novices.

了解气管插管的认知需求、技能和评估方法:认知任务分析
正确的气道管理是医院工作人员和急救人员学习的一项基本技能,因为它是危重患者护理的优先事项。至关重要的是,提供者应接受适当的培训,并有能力进行气管内插管(ETI),这是一种广泛使用的气道管理技术。已经创建了几个指标来衡量ETI程序中的能力。然而,仍有必要改进教育教育培训和评估,包括注重跨医学专业的合作研究,以建立更大的基于能力的培训和评估。培训和评价ETI还应纳入现代的、循证的程序性培训方法。目的本研究旨在运用认知任务分析(CTA)框架识别熟练执行任务所需的认知需求和技能,阐明新手和专家绩效的差异,并提供与任务相关的工作量的理解。将CTA框架应用于ETI,以便从多个医学专业的角度对任务和培训要求进行广泛的了解。方法在前人研究ETI任务和评估方法的基础上,采用CTA访谈法。共采访了来自多个医学专业的6名专家,以了解完成这项任务所需的认知技能。访谈根据每个类别的主要主题、次要主题和专业之间的差异进行编码。这些发现被汇编成技能树,以确定每个任务的培训需求和认知要求。结果CTA显示,设备设置和计划的一致性,通过谈话或大声思考的方法,是成功掌握ETI的关键。这些因素使提供者能够避免由于患者特征和环境因素而导致的错误。各专科之间的差异主要源于ETI实施的环境、后续治疗计划和可用资源。麻醉学通常代表着最理想的情况,具有很大的培训潜力,而护理人员则面临着基于环境和可用设备的最大数量的限制。尽管技能树不能完美地捕捉所有潜在案例的复杂性和细节,但它提供了对细微差别的技能和培训技术的洞察,这些技能和培训技术用于为新手在实践中可能发现的可变性做好准备。重要的是,CTA确定了如何克服新手面临的挑战,以及如何将这种培训应用于未来的案例。通过明确这些隐性技能和变化点,它们可以更好地转化为可教的细节。这些发现与之前的研究一致,这些研究着眼于开发改进的ETI评估指标,并通过深入研究反馈方法和帮助新手的策略来扩展他们的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 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