Fabrizio De Biasi, Carlotta Olivei Maddalena, A. Vergallo, G. Fiore, R. Balagna, Paolo Donato, Loris Cristofoli, P. Caironi, F. Marinangeli
{"title":"影响麻醉师在ACLS(AHA)-ACRM联合模拟训练后接受ACRM(麻醉危机资源管理)要点有用性的因素","authors":"Fabrizio De Biasi, Carlotta Olivei Maddalena, A. Vergallo, G. Fiore, R. Balagna, Paolo Donato, Loris Cristofoli, P. Caironi, F. Marinangeli","doi":"10.56126/73.2.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The factors that may contribute to learners’ perception about the usefulness of Anaesthesia Crisis Resource Management (ACRM) key points are little known.\n\nObjectives: We investigated the link between demographic factors and the effect of an ACRM simulation training on anaesthesiologists’ perceived value of ACRM key points.\n\nDesign: A prospective pre- and post-test survey from December 2017 to December 2019 of 111 anaesthesiologists involved into a combined ACRM-ACLS course in a simulation centre.\n\nMethods: Before and after the course participants were asked to indicate which were, in their opinion, the 5 ACRM key points most relevant for managing an anaesthetic emergency. No taxonomy tool of the 15 ACRM key points was used for teaching purposes.\n\nMain outcome measures: Pre-/post-course differences in participants’ subjective choices were connected by logistic regression analysis with demographic factors which included age, gender, years of work as anaesthesiologist, the amount of updating exposure, and familiarity with ACRM.\n\nResults: In median participants (47 M/64 F) had an age of 42 years (IQR 34-55 years), and 10 years working experience as anaesthesiologists (IQR 4-20 years). Around 20% of them had never heard of ACRM prior to this course. Communication was selected by up to 75% of participants without pre-/post-course differences. Although the other 4 ACRM points remained heterogeneously selected even after the course, we observed post-course vs pre-course increase in the selection rate of the ACRM points that address leadership, correct distribution of workload and utilization of all available resources. Among participants’ characteristics, the lack of familiarity with ACRM was the only significant predictor of the number of pre- to post-course changes in ACRM key points selection (OR=3.03, CI 95% 1.04 -9.09; p=0.0418).\n\nConclusions: The familiarity with ACRM should be considered when planning ACRM training, especially in cases where the ACRM training is not yet part of a formal education in anaesthesia.","PeriodicalId":7024,"journal":{"name":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors influencing anesthesiologistsperceived usefulness of ACRM (Anaesthesia Crisis Resources Management) key points after a combined ACLS (AHA)-ACRM similation training\",\"authors\":\"Fabrizio De Biasi, Carlotta Olivei Maddalena, A. Vergallo, G. Fiore, R. Balagna, Paolo Donato, Loris Cristofoli, P. Caironi, F. Marinangeli\",\"doi\":\"10.56126/73.2.09\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The factors that may contribute to learners’ perception about the usefulness of Anaesthesia Crisis Resource Management (ACRM) key points are little known.\\n\\nObjectives: We investigated the link between demographic factors and the effect of an ACRM simulation training on anaesthesiologists’ perceived value of ACRM key points.\\n\\nDesign: A prospective pre- and post-test survey from December 2017 to December 2019 of 111 anaesthesiologists involved into a combined ACRM-ACLS course in a simulation centre.\\n\\nMethods: Before and after the course participants were asked to indicate which were, in their opinion, the 5 ACRM key points most relevant for managing an anaesthetic emergency. No taxonomy tool of the 15 ACRM key points was used for teaching purposes.\\n\\nMain outcome measures: Pre-/post-course differences in participants’ subjective choices were connected by logistic regression analysis with demographic factors which included age, gender, years of work as anaesthesiologist, the amount of updating exposure, and familiarity with ACRM.\\n\\nResults: In median participants (47 M/64 F) had an age of 42 years (IQR 34-55 years), and 10 years working experience as anaesthesiologists (IQR 4-20 years). Around 20% of them had never heard of ACRM prior to this course. Communication was selected by up to 75% of participants without pre-/post-course differences. Although the other 4 ACRM points remained heterogeneously selected even after the course, we observed post-course vs pre-course increase in the selection rate of the ACRM points that address leadership, correct distribution of workload and utilization of all available resources. Among participants’ characteristics, the lack of familiarity with ACRM was the only significant predictor of the number of pre- to post-course changes in ACRM key points selection (OR=3.03, CI 95% 1.04 -9.09; p=0.0418).\\n\\nConclusions: The familiarity with ACRM should be considered when planning ACRM training, especially in cases where the ACRM training is not yet part of a formal education in anaesthesia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56126/73.2.09\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56126/73.2.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Factors influencing anesthesiologistsperceived usefulness of ACRM (Anaesthesia Crisis Resources Management) key points after a combined ACLS (AHA)-ACRM similation training
Background: The factors that may contribute to learners’ perception about the usefulness of Anaesthesia Crisis Resource Management (ACRM) key points are little known.
Objectives: We investigated the link between demographic factors and the effect of an ACRM simulation training on anaesthesiologists’ perceived value of ACRM key points.
Design: A prospective pre- and post-test survey from December 2017 to December 2019 of 111 anaesthesiologists involved into a combined ACRM-ACLS course in a simulation centre.
Methods: Before and after the course participants were asked to indicate which were, in their opinion, the 5 ACRM key points most relevant for managing an anaesthetic emergency. No taxonomy tool of the 15 ACRM key points was used for teaching purposes.
Main outcome measures: Pre-/post-course differences in participants’ subjective choices were connected by logistic regression analysis with demographic factors which included age, gender, years of work as anaesthesiologist, the amount of updating exposure, and familiarity with ACRM.
Results: In median participants (47 M/64 F) had an age of 42 years (IQR 34-55 years), and 10 years working experience as anaesthesiologists (IQR 4-20 years). Around 20% of them had never heard of ACRM prior to this course. Communication was selected by up to 75% of participants without pre-/post-course differences. Although the other 4 ACRM points remained heterogeneously selected even after the course, we observed post-course vs pre-course increase in the selection rate of the ACRM points that address leadership, correct distribution of workload and utilization of all available resources. Among participants’ characteristics, the lack of familiarity with ACRM was the only significant predictor of the number of pre- to post-course changes in ACRM key points selection (OR=3.03, CI 95% 1.04 -9.09; p=0.0418).
Conclusions: The familiarity with ACRM should be considered when planning ACRM training, especially in cases where the ACRM training is not yet part of a formal education in anaesthesia.
期刊介绍:
L’Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica est le journal de la SBAR, publié 4 fois par an. L’Acta a été publié pour la première fois en 1950. Depuis 1973 l’Acta est publié dans la langue Anglaise, ce qui a été résulté à un rayonnement plus internationaux. Depuis lors l’Acta est devenu un journal à ne pas manquer dans le domaine d’Anesthésie Belge, offrant e.a. les textes du congrès annuel, les Research Meetings, … Vous en trouvez aussi les dates des Research Meetings, du congrès annuel et des autres réunions.