Keith Couper1, Bilal Salman, Jasmeet Soar, Judith Finn, Gavin D Perkins. 1. Academic Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Resuscitation, MIDRU Building, Heartlands Hospital, Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, B9 5SS, UK. Keithcouper@googlemail.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: Intensive care clinicians play a central role in the co-ordination and treatment of patients that develop life-threatening emergencies. This review evaluates the effect of debriefing after life-threatening emergencies and considers the implications for intensive care training and practice. METHODS: Studies were identified by searching electronic databases, citation tracking, and contact with subject specialists. Studies evaluating the effect of debriefing after life-threatening emergencies on clinician performance (process) and/or patient outcomes were eligible for inclusion. Study quality was assessed and summarised using the GRADE system. RESULTS: The search identified 2,720 studies. After detailed review, 27 studies were included of which 20 supported the use of debriefing. Debriefing was viewed positively (n = 3), improved learning (n = 1), enhanced non-technical performance (n = 4) and technical performance (n = 16), and improved patient outcomes (n = 2). Four cardiac arrest studies were suitable for meta-analysis. This found evidence of improved resuscitation process outcomes [compression fraction (mean difference 6.80, 95 % CI 4.19-9.40, p < 0.001)] and short-term patient outcome [return of spontaneous circulation (OR 1.46, 95 % CI 1.01-2.13, p = 0.05)]. There was no effect on survival to hospital discharge (OR 0.80, 95 % CI 0.38-1.67, p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: This review supports the use of structured debriefing as an educational strategy to improve clinician knowledge and skill acquisition and implementation of those skills in practice. However, the effect of debriefing on long-term patient outcomes is uncertain. There remains a need for further high-quality research, which seeks to identify the optimal method for debriefing delivery and effect on patient outcomes.
PURPOSE: Intensive care clinicians play a central role in the co-ordination and treatment of patients that develop life-threatening emergencies. This review evaluates the effect of debriefing after life-threatening emergencies and considers the implications for intensive care training and practice. METHODS: Studies were identified by searching electronic databases, citation tracking, and contact with subject specialists. Studies evaluating the effect of debriefing after life-threatening emergencies on clinician performance (process) and/or patient outcomes were eligible for inclusion. Study quality was assessed and summarised using the GRADE system. RESULTS: The search identified 2,720 studies. After detailed review, 27 studies were included of which 20 supported the use of debriefing. Debriefing was viewed positively (n = 3), improved learning (n = 1), enhanced non-technical performance (n = 4) and technical performance (n = 16), and improved patient outcomes (n = 2). Four cardiac arrest studies were suitable for meta-analysis. This found evidence of improved resuscitation process outcomes [compression fraction (mean difference 6.80, 95 % CI 4.19-9.40, p < 0.001)] and short-term patient outcome [return of spontaneous circulation (OR 1.46, 95 % CI 1.01-2.13, p = 0.05)]. There was no effect on survival to hospital discharge (OR 0.80, 95 % CI 0.38-1.67, p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: This review supports the use of structured debriefing as an educational strategy to improve clinician knowledge and skill acquisition and implementation of those skills in practice. However, the effect of debriefing on long-term patient outcomes is uncertain. There remains a need for further high-quality research, which seeks to identify the optimal method for debriefing delivery and effect on patient outcomes.
Authors: Katherine B Percarpio; Fonda S Harris; Betty Ann Hatfield; Barbara Dunlap; Walter E Diekroger; Pamela D Nichols; Lisa M Mazzia; Peter D Mills; Julia B Neily Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2010-09
Authors: Gavin D Perkins; Hannah Barrett; Ian Bullock; David A Gabbott; Jerry P Nolan; Sarah Mitchell; Alasdair Short; Christopher M Smith; Gary B Smith; Susan Todd; Julian F Bion Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-10-21 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: R P Dellinger; Mitchell M Levy; Andrew Rhodes; Djillali Annane; Herwig Gerlach; Steven M Opal; Jonathan E Sevransky; Charles L Sprung; Ivor S Douglas; Roman Jaeschke; Tiffany M Osborn; Mark E Nunnally; Sean R Townsend; Konrad Reinhart; Ruth M Kleinpell; Derek C Angus; Clifford S Deutschman; Flavia R Machado; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Steven Webb; Richard J Beale; Jean-Louis Vincent; Rui Moreno Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2013-01-30 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Giuseppe Citerio; Jan Bakker; Matteo Bassetti; Dominique Benoit; Maurizio Cecconi; J Randall Curtis; Glenn Hernandez; Margaret Herridge; Samir Jaber; Michael Joannidis; Laurent Papazian; Mark Peters; Pierre Singer; Martin Smith; Marcio Soares; Antoni Torres; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Jean-François Timsit; Elie Azoulay Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Keith Couper; Peter K Kimani; Benjamin S Abella; Mehboob Chilwan; Matthew W Cooke; Robin P Davies; Richard A Field; Fang Gao; Sarah Quinton; Nigel Stallard; Sarah Woolley; Gavin D Perkins Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Jill R McTavish; Melissa Kimber; Karen Devries; Manuela Colombini; Jennifer C D MacGregor; C Nadine Wathen; Arnav Agarwal; Harriet L MacMillan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-10-16 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Robert Greif; Andrew Lockey; Jan Breckwoldt; Francesc Carmona; Patricia Conaghan; Artem Kuzovlev; Lucas Pflanzl-Knizacek; Ferenc Sari; Salma Shammet; Andrea Scapigliati; Nigel Turner; Joyce Yeung; Koenraad G Monsieurs Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 0.826
Authors: Katherine J Jones; John Crowe; Joseph A Allen; Anne M Skinner; Robin High; Victoria Kennel; Roni Reiter-Palmon Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-09-09 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Phavalan Rajendram; Lowyl Notario; Cliff Reid; Charles R Wira; Jose I Suarez; Scott D Weingart; Houman Khosravani Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2020-08-13 Impact factor: 3.210