Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on August 24, 2009
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2009 103(4):531-537; doi:10.1093/bja/aep222
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
103/4/531    most recent
aep222v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in BJA
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morgan, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Law, J. A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Morgan, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Law, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author [2009]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournal.org

Efficacy of high-fidelity simulation debriefing on the performance of practicing anaesthetists in simulated scenarios

P. J. Morgan1,*, J. Tarshis2, V. LeBlanc3, D. Cleave-Hogg1, S. DeSousa2, M. F. Haley1, J. Herold-McIlroy3 and J. A. Law4

1 Department of Anesthesia, Women's College Hospital, 76 Grenville St., Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 1B2.
2 Department of Anesthesia, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
3 Wilson Centre for Research in Education, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.
4 Department of Anesthesia, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

* Corresponding author. E-mail: pam.morgan{at}utoronto.ca

Background: Research into adverse events in hospitalized patients suggests that a significant number are preventable. The purpose of this randomized, controlled study was to determine if simulation-based debriefing improved performance of practicing anaesthetists managing high-fidelity simulation scenarios.

Methods: The anaesthetists were randomly allocated to Group A: simulation debriefing; Group B: home study; and Group C: no intervention and secondary randomization to one of two scenarios. Six to nine months later, subjects returned to manage the alternate scenario. Facilitators blinded to study group allocation completed the performance checklists (dichotomously scored checklist, DSC) and Global Rating Scale of Performance (GRS). Two non-expert raters were trained, and assessed all videotaped performances.

Results: Interim analysis indicated no difference between Groups B and C which were merged into one group. Seventy-four subjects were recruited, with 58 complete data sets available. There was no significant effect of group on pre-test scores. A significant improvement was seen between pre- and post-tests on the DSC in debriefed subjects (pre-test 66.8%, post-test 70.3%; F1,57=4.18, P=0.046). Both groups showed significant improvement in the GRS over time (F1,57=5.94, P=0.018), but no significant difference between the groups.

Conclusions: We found a modest improvement in performance on a DSC in the debriefed group and overall improvement in both control and debriefed groups using a GRS. Whether this improvement translates into clinical practice has yet to be determined.

Keywords: education; safety, patient safety; simulation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in BJA:

In the October 2009 BJA ...

BJA 2009 103: NP. [Extract] [Full Text]  





Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.