Oner Ceyda, Fisher Nelli, Atallah Fouad, Son Mary Ann, Homel Peter, Mykhalchenko Katerina, Minkoff Howard
From the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology (C.O., N.F., F.A., M.A.S., H.M.), Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn; Medicine (P.H.), Albert Einstein College of Medicine, SUNY Downstate, New York; and Family Medicine (K.M.), Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center, Bronx, NY.
Simul Healthc. 2018 Dec;13(6):404-412. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000335.
Assertiveness is essential for communication and/or speaking up. We performed a randomized trial to assess the effectiveness of assertiveness/advocacy/CUS/two-challenge rule (AACT) simulation-based education for labor and delivery, as well as postpartum nurses. We aimed to determine whether this training would improve labor and delivery and postpartum nurses speaking up in the clinical setting.
We conducted a randomized controlled trial among nurses on labor and delivery and postpartum units. During the intervention, participants were trained on abnormal vital signs, underwent a baseline assertiveness self-assessment, and were block-randomized (by work location: labor and delivery or postpartum) to either simulation-based AACT (intervention) or I-PASS [Illness Severity, Patient Summary, Action List, Situational Awareness and Contingency Planning, Synthesis by Receiver hand-off tool education] (control) simulation-based education. The outcome part of the study consisted of an in situ simulated clinical encounter during which each individual learner's assertive behaviors were assessed as they found out about a patient's abnormal vital signs. Two raters, different from those that participated in the intervention part of the experiment, and who were blinded to whether the learner was in the control or intervention arm, scored participants. The learner (Registered Nurse) was not aware that this was an in situ simulation and perceived this as a real clinical encounter. The degree to which the learners spoke up was measured using a validated scale (Pian-Smith).
Seventy nurses completed the study. There were 34 learners in the intervention and 36 in the control groups. Among those in the intervention group, there were 18 labor and delivery (LDI) nurses and 16 postpartum (PPI) nurses. Among the control group, there were 14 labor and delivery (LDC) nurses and 22 postpartum (PPC) nurses. Using a five-point Pian-Smith scale, we demonstrated that there was no difference in the likelihood of speaking up between the overall intervention and control groups (2.00 ± 1.00 and 1.65 ± 0.82, P = 0.10). Among controls, the likelihood of speaking up was higher for labor and delivery nurses than for postpartum nurses (P < 0.006). There was a significant interaction (P = 0.02) between treatment group and work location. Although the control and intervention groups from labor and delivery showed similar higher levels of speaking up (2.29 ± 0.89 and 2.06 ± 0.95, respectively, P = 0.49), postpartum nurses in the intervention arm were more likely to speak up than were postpartum nurses in the control arm (1.97 ± 1.07 vs. 1.25 ± 0.43, P = 0.007).
Although there was no difference in speaking up scores between intervention and control groups overall, simulation-based AACT training among postpartum nurses was associated with a statistically significant increase in the likelihood of speaking up during a challenging simulated clinical encounter. The degree of change makes the clinical significance uncertain. There was no statistically significant difference in the likelihood of speaking up among labor and delivery nurses.
自信对于沟通和/或表达意见至关重要。我们进行了一项随机试验,以评估基于自信/支持/CUS/双挑战规则(AACT)模拟的教育对分娩及产后护理护士的有效性。我们旨在确定这种培训是否会提高分娩及产后护理护士在临床环境中的表达能力。
我们在分娩及产后护理单元的护士中进行了一项随机对照试验。在干预期间,参与者接受了异常生命体征的培训,进行了基线自信自我评估,并按工作地点(分娩或产后)进行区组随机分组,分为基于模拟的AACT(干预组)或I-PASS[疾病严重程度、患者总结、行动清单、情景意识和应急计划、接收者交接工具综合教育](对照组)模拟教育。研究的结果部分包括一次现场模拟临床遭遇,在此期间,当每个个体学习者发现患者异常生命体征时,评估他们的自信行为。两名评分者对参与者进行评分,这两名评分者不同于参与实验干预部分的人员,且对学习者是在对照组还是干预组不知情。学习者(注册护士)不知道这是一次现场模拟,而是将其视为一次真实的临床遭遇。使用经过验证的量表(皮安-史密斯量表)来衡量学习者表达意见的程度。
70名护士完成了研究。干预组有34名学习者,对照组有36名。在干预组中,有18名分娩(LDI)护士和16名产后(PPI)护士。在对照组中,有14名分娩(LDC)护士和22名产后(PPC)护士。使用五点皮安-史密斯量表,我们发现总体干预组和对照组在表达意见的可能性上没有差异(2.00±1.00和1.65±0.82,P=0.10)。在对照组中,分娩护士表达意见的可能性高于产后护士(P<0.006)。治疗组和工作地点之间存在显著交互作用(P=0.02)。尽管分娩组的对照组和干预组表达意见的水平相似(分别为2.29±0.89和2.06±0.95,P=0.49),但干预组的产后护士比对照组的产后护士更有可能表达意见(1.97±1.07对1.25±0.43,P=0.007)。
尽管总体上干预组和对照组在表达意见得分上没有差异,但产后护士基于模拟的AACT培训与在具有挑战性的模拟临床遭遇中表达意见的可能性在统计学上显著增加相关。变化程度使临床意义不确定。分娩护士在表达意见的可能性上没有统计学上的显著差异。