PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 1992Anesthesiology178 citationsOpen Access

Anesthesiologists' Management of Simulated Critical Incidents

View Full Paper
HSHoward A. SchwidDODaniel O’Donnell

Key Result

In a computer-based simulation of critical anesthesia incidents, serious errors were common across experience levels, with only 40% correctly diagnosing anaphylaxis and 30% properly managing cardiac arrest.

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=30)

Structured PICO

P
Population
30 anesthesia residents, faculty, and private practice anesthesiologists evaluated on their management of simulated critical incidents.
E
Exposure
Management of simulated emergency situations using a computer-based anesthesia simulator
O
Outcome
Patterns of errors in diagnosis and treatment of simulated critical incidents

Anesthesiologists, regardless of experience level, frequently make diagnostic and treatment errors during simulated critical incidents, highlighting the importance of ongoing training such as ACLS.

Abstract

Human error is believed to contribute to the majority of negative anesthesia outcomes. Because retrospective analysis of critical incidents has several shortcomings and prospective studies are limited by the low frequency of critical incidents, an anesthesia simulator was used to evaluate the management of simulated emergency situations by ten anesthesia residents, ten faculty anesthesiologists, and ten anesthesiologists in private practice in order to identify specific patterns of errors in diagnosis and treatment. The simulator is a computer program that presents the patient, monitors, and management choices in a graphical display on an IBM or compatible personal computer. Many errors were observed in the management of these emergency situations, and even anesthesiologists with years of experience made serious errors. Although all experienced anesthesiologists correctly diagnosed simulated esophageal intubation, two residents misinterpreted the lack of end-tidal carbon dioxide. Only 40% of subjects correctly diagnosed simulated anaphylactic reaction; 27% adequately treated simulated myocardial ischemia; and 30% managed a simulated cardiac arrest according to Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) guidelines. Problems with continuous infusions of vasoactive agents were common. Fixation errors or failure to revise a plan in the presence of inconsistent cues were made by 63% of subjects. The subjects that gathered more information during simulated anaphylaxis made the correct diagnosis more often and made fewer treatment errors. The time since the last ACLS training was found to be an important predictor of correct management of simulated cardiac arrest.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Schwid et al. (1992) conducted a cross-sectional in Simulated critical incidents in anesthesia (n=30). Simulated critical incidents using an anesthesia simulator was evaluated on Errors in diagnosis and treatment of simulated emergency situations. In a computer-based simulation of critical anesthesia incidents, serious errors were common across experience levels, with only 40% correctly diagnosing anaphylaxis and 30% properly managing cardiac arrest.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a62385b4cf9e5f8a6c20895https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-199204000-00002
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper