Department of Emergency Medicine, Michigan State University/Kalamazoo Center for Medical Studies, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Jan;19(1):37-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01252.x.
Systematic evaluation of prehospital provider performance during actual resuscitations is difficult. Although prior studies reported pediatric drug-dosing mistakes and other types of management errors, the underlying causes of those errors were not investigated. The objective of this study was to identify causes of errors during a simulated, prehospital pediatric emergency.
Two-person emergency medical services (EMS) crews from five geographically diverse agencies participated in a validated simulation of an infant with altered mental status, seizures, and respiratory arrest using their own equipment and drugs. A scoring protocol was used to identify errors. A debriefing conducted by a trained facilitator immediately after the simulated event elicited root causes of active and latent errors, which were analyzed by thematic qualitative assessment methods.
Forty-five crews completed the study. Clinically important themes that emerged from the data included oxygen delivery, equipment organization and use, glucose measurement, drug administration, and inappropriate cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Delay in delivery of supplemental oxygen resulted from two different automaticity errors and a 54% failure rate in using an oropharyngeal airway (OPA). Most crews struggled to locate essential pediatric equipment. Three found broken or inoperable bag/valve/masks (BVMs), resulting in delayed ventilation. Some mistrusted their intraosseous (IO) injection gun device; others used it incorrectly. Only 51% of crews measured blood glucose; some discovered that glucometers were not stored in their sealed pediatric bags. The error rate for diazepam dosing was 47%; for midazolam, it was 60%. Underlying causes of dosing errors were found in four domains (cognitive, procedural, affective, and teamwork), and they included incorrect estimates of weight, incorrect use of the Broselow pediatric emergency tape, faulty recollection of doses, difficulty with calculations under stress, mg/kg to mg to mL conversion errors, inaccurate measurement of volumes, use of the wrong end of prefilled syringes, and failure to crosscheck doses with partners.
Simulation, followed immediately by facilitated debriefing, uncovered underlying causes of active cognitive, procedural, affective, and teamwork errors, latent errors, and error-producing conditions in EMS pediatric care.
系统评估实际复苏过程中现场急救人员的表现较为困难。虽然先前的研究报告了儿科药物给药错误和其他类型的管理错误,但并未调查这些错误的根本原因。本研究的目的是确定模拟院前儿科急救中出现错误的原因。
来自五个地理位置不同的机构的两名急救医疗服务(EMS)人员使用自己的设备和药物,参与了一项经验证的模拟婴儿改变神志、癫痫发作和呼吸停止的案例。使用评分方案识别错误。在模拟事件后立即由经过培训的协调员进行的情况介绍会引出了主动和潜在错误的根本原因,然后使用主题定性评估方法进行分析。
共有 45 个小组完成了这项研究。从数据中得出的具有临床重要性的主题包括氧气输送、设备的组织和使用、血糖测量、药物管理和不适当的心肺复苏。补充氧气的延迟交付是由两个不同的自动化错误和 54%的口咽气道(OPA)使用失败率导致的。大多数小组在寻找基本儿科设备时都遇到了困难。三个小组发现了破损或无法使用的袋/阀/面罩(BVM),导致通气延迟。有些小组不信任他们的骨髓内(IO)注射枪设备;其他人则错误地使用了它。只有 51%的小组测量了血糖;一些人发现血糖仪未存放在密封的儿科袋中。地西泮给药的错误率为 47%;咪达唑仑的错误率为 60%。在四个领域(认知、程序、情感和团队合作)中发现了给药错误的根本原因,包括体重估计错误、布罗塞洛儿科急救带使用错误、剂量记忆错误、在压力下计算困难、mg/kg 至 mg 至 mL 转换错误、体积测量不准确、使用预充注射器的错误末端以及未能与伙伴交叉核对剂量。
模拟,紧接着是有针对性的情况介绍会,揭示了 EMS 儿科护理中主动认知、程序、情感和团队合作错误、潜在错误和产生错误的条件的根本原因。