Clebone Anna, Klock P Allan, Choi Ellen Y, Tung Avery
Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 28;20(2):e0314774. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314774. eCollection 2025.
During surgery and anesthesia, life-threatening critical events, including cardiac arrest, may occur. By facilitating recall of key management steps, suggesting diagnostic possibilities, and providing dose and drug information, cognitive aids may improve clinician performance during such events. In actual clinical practice, however, cognitive aids may be available but inconsistently used. One possibility explaining aid non-use during critical events is a lack of familiarity with how cognitive aids may be helpful. We hypothesized that introduction of critical event cognitive aids along with implementation of cognitive aid resources would change the quantitative incidence of cognitive aid use and qualitative reasons for aid non-use. We surveyed members of an academic anesthesia department before and after implementation of critical event cognitive aid resources.
All anesthesia clinicians at a single academic medical center were surveyed. Participants were surveyed both pre- and post-training with a focused program to introduce critical event cognitive aid resources. Incidences of and reasons for cognitive aid use and non-use were collected and analyzed. Survey responses were compared pre- and post-implementation.
The response rate was 64.5%. One-hundred eighty-five reasons for non-use were collected before the focused program and 149 after. Overall, 80% of clinicians had encountered at least one critical event during the study period and use of cognitive aids during all reported events was 7%. Six categories of reasons for non-use were identified: 'Not Available', 'Not Needed', 'No Time', 'Another Person In Charge', 'Used In Another Way', 'No Reason Given'. After implementation, a decrease in the number of respondents who cited availability and who cited 'another person running crisis,' as reasons for non-use was observed (p < 0.001).
Implementation of cognitive aids for critical events in an academic anesthesia environment improved the perception of cognitive aid availability and decreased the number of subjects who chose to not use the aid due to another person running the crisis response. Looking at the multiple reasons for cognitive aid non-use may guide implementation, training, and design.
在手术和麻醉过程中,可能会发生危及生命的重大事件,包括心脏骤停。通过促进对关键管理步骤的回忆、提示诊断可能性以及提供剂量和药物信息,认知辅助工具可能会改善临床医生在此类事件中的表现。然而,在实际临床实践中,认知辅助工具可能存在但使用并不一致。一种解释在重大事件中不使用辅助工具的可能性是缺乏对认知辅助工具如何发挥作用的熟悉程度。我们假设引入重大事件认知辅助工具并实施认知辅助资源将改变认知辅助工具使用的定量发生率以及不使用辅助工具的定性原因。我们在实施重大事件认知辅助资源之前和之后对一个学术麻醉科的成员进行了调查。
对一家学术医疗中心的所有麻醉临床医生进行了调查。参与者在接受一项重点介绍重大事件认知辅助资源的培训项目前后都接受了调查。收集并分析了认知辅助工具使用和不使用的发生率及原因。比较了实施前后的调查回复。
回复率为64.5%。在重点项目实施前收集到185条不使用的原因,实施后为149条。总体而言,80%的临床医生在研究期间至少遇到过一次重大事件,在所有报告事件中认知辅助工具的使用率为7%。确定了六类不使用的原因:“没有”、“不需要”、“没时间”、“另有人负责”、“以其他方式使用”、“未给出原因”。实施后,观察到将可用性和“另有人应对危机”作为不使用原因的受访者数量有所减少(p < 0.001)。
在学术麻醉环境中实施重大事件认知辅助工具改善了对认知辅助工具可用性的认知,并减少了因另有人应对危机而选择不使用辅助工具的受试者数量。审视认知辅助工具不使用的多种原因可能会指导实施、培训和设计。