Suppr超能文献

院际转运期间的复苏标准:结构化团队简报或指南审查的效果——两种微干预措施的随机对照模拟研究

Standards of resuscitation during inter-hospital transportation: the effects of structured team briefing or guideline review - a randomised, controlled simulation study of two micro-interventions.

作者信息

Høyer Christian B, Christensen Erika F, Eika Berit

机构信息

Centre for Medical Education, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark.

Central Region Denmark, Department of Prehospital Medical Services, Aarhus, Denmark.

出版信息

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011 Mar 3;19:15. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-19-15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Junior physicians are sometimes sent in ambulances with critically ill patients who require urgent transfer to another hospital. Unfamiliar surroundings and personnel, time pressure, and lack of experience may imply a risk of insufficient treatment during transportation as this can cause the physician to loose the expected overview of the situation. While health care professionals are expected to follow complex algorithms when resuscitating, stress can compromise both solo-performance and teamwork.

AIM

To examine whether inter-hospital resuscitation improved with a structured team briefing between physician and ambulance crew in preparation for transfer vs. review of resuscitation guidelines. The effect parameters were physician team leadership (requesting help, delegating tasks), time to resuscitation key elements (chest compressions, defibrillation, ventilations, medication, or a combination of these termed "the first meaningful action"), and hands-off ratio.

PARTICIPANTS

46 physicians graduated within 5 years.

DESIGN

A simulation intervention study with a control group and two interventions (structured team briefing or review of guidelines). Scenario: Cardiac arrest during simulated inter-hospital transfer.

RESULTS

Forty-six candidates participated: 16 (control), 13 (review), and 17 (team briefing). Reviewing guidelines delayed requesting help to 162 seconds, compared to 21 seconds in control and team briefing groups (p = 0.021). Help was not requested in 15% of cases; never requesting help was associated with an increased hands-off ratio, from 39% if the driver's assistance was requested to 54% if not (p < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found between groups regarding time to first chest compression, defibrillation, ventilation, drug administration, or the combined "time to first meaningful action".

CONCLUSION

Neither review nor team briefing improved the time to resuscitation key elements. Review led to an eight-fold increase in the delay to requesting help. The association between never requesting help and an increased hands-off ratio underpins the importance of prioritising available resources. Other medical and non-medical domains have benefited from the use of guidelines reviews and structured team briefings. Reviewing guidelines may compromise the ability to focus on aspects such as team leading and delegating tasks and warrants the need for further studies focusing on how to avoid this cognitive impairment.

摘要

背景

初级医生有时会乘坐救护车护送重症患者,这些患者需要紧急转院至其他医院。陌生的环境和人员、时间压力以及经验不足,可能意味着转运过程中存在治疗不充分的风险,因为这可能导致医生无法全面掌控病情。虽然医护人员在进行复苏时应遵循复杂的算法,但压力可能会影响个人表现和团队协作。

目的

研究与复习复苏指南相比,医生与救护人员在转院准备阶段进行结构化团队简报是否能改善院间复苏情况。效果参数包括医生团队领导能力(请求帮助、分配任务)、达到复苏关键要素的时间(胸外按压、除颤、通气、用药,或这些要素的组合,称为“首次有效行动”)以及放手比例。

参与者

46名毕业5年内的医生。

设计

一项模拟干预研究,设有一个对照组和两种干预措施(结构化团队简报或复习指南)。场景:模拟院间转运期间的心脏骤停。

结果

46名参与者:16名(对照组)、13名(复习组)和17名(团队简报组)。复习指南组请求帮助的时间延迟至162秒,而对照组和团队简报组分别为21秒(p = 0.021)。15%的病例未请求帮助;从未请求帮助与放手比例增加相关,若请求司机协助,放手比例为39%,若未请求则增至54%(p < 0.01)。在达到首次胸外按压、除颤、通气、用药或综合“首次有效行动”的时间方面,各组之间未发现统计学显著差异。

结论

复习指南和团队简报均未改善达到复苏关键要素的时间。复习导致请求帮助的延迟增加了八倍。从未请求帮助与放手比例增加之间的关联凸显了合理分配现有资源的重要性。其他医学和非医学领域已从使用指南复习和结构化团队简报中受益。复习指南可能会影响专注于团队领导和任务分配等方面的能力,因此有必要进一步研究如何避免这种认知障碍。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a804/3061934/c5443490a332/1757-7241-19-15-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验