Ibrahim Abd El-Shafy1, Jennifer Delgado2, Meredith Akerman3, Francesca Bullaro2, Nathan A M Christopherson4, Jose M Prince5. 1. Department of Surgery, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Cohen Children׳s Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York; Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York; Department of Surgery, Maimonadies Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York. 2. Department of Surgery, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Cohen Children׳s Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York. 3. Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York. 4. Department of Surgery, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Cohen Children׳s Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York; Department of Surgery, Maimonadies Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York. 5. Department of Surgery, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Cohen Children׳s Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York; Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York; Trauma Institute, Northwell Health System, New York. Electronic address: jprince@northwell.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric trauma care requires effective and clear communication in a time-sensitive manner amongst a variety of disciplines. Programs such as Crew Resource Management in aviation have been developed to systematically prevent errors. Similarly, teamSTEPPS has been promoted in healthcare with a strong focus on communication. We aim to evaluate the ability of closed-loop communication to improve time-to-task completion in pediatric trauma activations. METHODS: All pediatric trauma activations from January to September, 2016 at an American College of Surgeons verified level I pediatric trauma center were video recorded and included in the study. Two independent reviewers identified and classified all verbal orders issued by the trauma team leader for order audibility, directed responsibility, check-back, and time-to-task-completion. The impact of pre-notification and level of activation on time-to-task-completion was also evaluated. All analyses were performed using SAS® version 9.4(SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). RESULTS: In total, 89 trauma activation videos were reviewed, with 387 verbal orders identified. Of those, 126(32.6%) were directed, 372(96.1%) audible, and 101(26.1%) closed-loop. On average each order required 3.85 minutes to be completed. There was a significant reduction in time-to-task-completion when closed-loop communication was utilized (p < 0.0001). Orders with closed-loop communication were completed 3.6 times sooner as compared to orders with an open-loop [HR = 3.6 (95% CI: 2.5, 5.3)]. There was not a significant difference in time-to-task-completion with respect to pre-notification by emergency service providers (p < 0.6100). [HR = 1.1 (95% CI: 0.9, 1.3)]. There was also not a significant difference in time-to-task-completion with respect to level of trauma team activation (p < 0.2229). [HR = 1.3 (95% CI: 0.8, 2.1)]. CONCLUSION: While closed-loop communication prevents medical errors, our study highlights the potential to increase the speed and efficiency with which tasks are completed in the setting of pediatric trauma resuscitation. Trauma drills and systems of communication that emphasize the use of closed-loop communication should be incorporated into the training of trauma team leaders. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: This is a prospective observational study with intervention level II evidence.
BACKGROUND:Pediatric trauma care requires effective and clear communication in a time-sensitive manner amongst a variety of disciplines. Programs such as Crew Resource Management in aviation have been developed to systematically prevent errors. Similarly, teamSTEPPS has been promoted in healthcare with a strong focus on communication. We aim to evaluate the ability of closed-loop communication to improve time-to-task completion in pediatric trauma activations. METHODS: All pediatric trauma activations from January to September, 2016 at an American College of Surgeons verified level I pediatric trauma center were video recorded and included in the study. Two independent reviewers identified and classified all verbal orders issued by the trauma team leader for order audibility, directed responsibility, check-back, and time-to-task-completion. The impact of pre-notification and level of activation on time-to-task-completion was also evaluated. All analyses were performed using SAS® version 9.4(SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). RESULTS: In total, 89 trauma activation videos were reviewed, with 387 verbal orders identified. Of those, 126(32.6%) were directed, 372(96.1%) audible, and 101(26.1%) closed-loop. On average each order required 3.85 minutes to be completed. There was a significant reduction in time-to-task-completion when closed-loop communication was utilized (p < 0.0001). Orders with closed-loop communication were completed 3.6 times sooner as compared to orders with an open-loop [HR = 3.6 (95% CI: 2.5, 5.3)]. There was not a significant difference in time-to-task-completion with respect to pre-notification by emergency service providers (p < 0.6100). [HR = 1.1 (95% CI: 0.9, 1.3)]. There was also not a significant difference in time-to-task-completion with respect to level of trauma team activation (p < 0.2229). [HR = 1.3 (95% CI: 0.8, 2.1)]. CONCLUSION: While closed-loop communication prevents medical errors, our study highlights the potential to increase the speed and efficiency with which tasks are completed in the setting of pediatric trauma resuscitation. Trauma drills and systems of communication that emphasize the use of closed-loop communication should be incorporated into the training of trauma team leaders. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: This is a prospective observational study with intervention level II evidence.
Keywords:
Interpersonal and Communication Skills; closed-Loop communication; pediatric trauma; time to task completion; trauma team leader; trauma video review
Authors: Kate E Hughes; Patrick G Hughes; Thomas Cahir; Jennifer Plitt; Vivienne Ng; Edward Bedrick; Rami A Ahmed Journal: BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn Date: 2019-12-20
Authors: John T Paige; Deborah D Garbee; Qingzhao Yu; John Zahmjahn; Raquel Baroni de Carvalho; Lin Zhu; Vadym Rusnak; Vladimir J Kiselov Journal: BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn Date: 2021-01-27
Authors: Annemarie Fridrich; Anita Imhof; Sven Staender; Mirko Brenni; David Schwappach Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 2.257
Authors: Aaron R Jensen; Francesca Bullaro; Richard A Falcone; Margot Daugherty; L Caulette Young; Cory McLaughlin; Caron Park; Christianne Lane; Jose M Prince; Daniel J Scherzer; Tensing Maa; Julie Dunn; Laura Wining; Joseph Hess; Mary C Santos; James O'Neill; Eric Katz; Karen O'Bosky; Timothy Young; Emily Christison-Lagay; Omar Ahmed; Randall S Burd; Marc Auerbach Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2019-08-05 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Katherine M Marsh; Mark A Fleming; Florence E Turrentine; Daniel E Levin; Jeffrey W Gander; Jessica Keim-Malpass; R Scott Jones Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 2.545