Literature DB >> 26275743

A Survey of the First-Hour Basic Care Tasks of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in Pediatric Patients and an Evaluation of Medical Simulation on Improving the Compliance of the Tasks.

Juan Qian1, Ying Wang1, Yucai Zhang2, Xiaodong Zhu3, Qunfang Rong2, Hongxia Wei3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Application of the sepsis resuscitation bundle is limited by clinician knowledge, skills, and experience. We used the adjusted first-hour basic care tasks in pediatric patients in three tertiary hospitals in Shanghai, China.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to survey the compliance of the adjusted tasks and to evaluate in situ simulation team training on improving the compliance.
METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed with the survey checklists from May 2011 to January 2012 in three pediatric intensive care units. A simulated case scenario was administered to the practitioners in one hospital.
RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were enrolled, including 47 patients in one simulation hospital (SH) and 26 patients in two nonsimulation hospitals (NSH). The total compliance of the tasks was 47.9% (35/73). The compliance in the SH was significantly higher compared to that in the NSHs (61.7% [29/47] vs. 23.1% [6/26], p < 0.01). Compared to the SH, the main problems in the NSH were giving intravenous or intraosseous fluid resuscitation in a longer time (35.3 min vs. 19.9 min, p = 0.000), a smaller percentage of measurement of accurate urine output (38.5% vs. 68.1%, p = 0.027), delivering high-flow oxygen (73.1% vs. 93.6%, p = 0.028), and measurement of lactate (69.2% vs. 100%, p = 0.000).
CONCLUSIONS: In situ simulation team training is an effective method of teaching the tasks of septic shock care to clinicians and nurses on the front line and of improving the compliance of the tasks.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  pediatric; sepsis; shock; simulation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26275743     DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2015.05.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Emerg Med        ISSN: 0736-4679            Impact factor:   1.484


  7 in total

Review 1.  2016 Update for the Rogers' Textbook of Pediatric Intensive Care: Recognition and Initial Management of Shock.

Authors:  Julie C Fitzgerald; Scott L Weiss; Niranjan Kissoon
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.624

2.  The effect of in situ simulation training on the performance of tasks related to patient safety during sedation.

Authors:  Meital Ben-Ari; Gilad Chayen; Ivan P Steiner; Dana Aronson Schinasi; Oren Feldman; Itai Shavit
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.078

3.  A Validation Argument for a Simulation-Based Training Course Centered on Assessment, Recognition, and Early Management of Pediatric Sepsis.

Authors:  Gary L Geis; Derek S Wheeler; Amy Bunger; Laura G Militello; Regina G Taylor; Jerome P Bauer; Terri L Byczkowski; Benjamin T Kerrey; Mary D Patterson
Journal:  Simul Healthc       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.929

4.  An email-based survey of practice regarding hemodynamic monitoring and management in children with septic shock in China.

Authors:  Ying Wang; Juan Qian; Suyun Qian; Chunfeng Liu; Yibing Chen; Guoping Lu; Yucai Zhang; Xiaoxu Ren
Journal:  Transl Pediatr       Date:  2021-03

5.  What Do We Know About Teamwork in Chinese Hospitals? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Hujie Wang; Martina Buljac-Samardzic; Wenxing Wang; Jeroen van Wijngaarden; Shasha Yuan; Joris van de Klundert
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2021-12-17

6.  Implementation and evaluation of a shock curriculum using simulation in Manila, Philippines: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Sarah E Gardner Yelton; Lorelie Cañete Ramos; Carolyn J Reuland; Paula Pilar G Evangelista; Nicole A Shilkofski
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 3.263

Review 7.  Is in situ simulation in emergency medicine safe? A scoping review.

Authors:  Jennifer Truchot; Valérie Boucher; Winny Li; Guillaume Martel; Eva Jouhair; Éliane Raymond-Dufresne; Andrew Petrosoniak; Marcel Emond
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 3.006

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.