A simulation-based randomized trial of ABCDE style cognitive aid for emergency medical services CHecklist In Prehospital Settings: the CHIPS-study.
ABCDE mnemonic
ABCDE scheme
Checklists
Medical simulation
Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA)
Patient safety
Resuscitation
Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)
Journal
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine
ISSN: 1757-7241
Titre abrégé: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101477511
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Nov 2023
17 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
15
02
2023
accepted:
05
11
2023
medline:
20
11
2023
pubmed:
18
11
2023
entrez:
18
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Checklists are a powerful tool for reduction of mortality and morbidity. Checklists structure complex processes in a reproducible manner, optimize team interaction, and prevent errors related to human factors. Despite wide dissemination of the checklist, effects of checklist use in the prehospital emergency medicine are currently unclear. The aim of the study was to demonstrate that participants achieve higher adherence to guideline-recommended actions, manage the scenario more time-efficient, and thirdly demonstrate better adherence to the ABCDE-compliant workflow in a simulated ROSC situation. CHIPS was a prospective randomized case-control study. Professional emergency medical service teams were asked to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation on an adult high-fidelity patient simulator achieving ROSC. The intervention group used a checklist which transferred the ERC guideline statements of ROSC into the structure of the 'ABCDE' mnemonic. Guideline adherence (performance score, PS), utilization of process time (items/minute) and workflow were measured by analyzing continuous A/V recordings of the simulation. Pre- and post-questionnaires addressing demographics and relevance of the checklist were recorded. Effect sizes were determined by calculating Cohen's d. The level of significance was defined at p < 0.05. Twenty scenarios in the intervention group (INT) and twenty-one in the control group (CON) were evaluated. The average time of use of the checklist (CU) in the INT was 6.32 min (2.39-9.18 min; SD = 2.08 min). Mean PS of INT was significantly higher than CON, with a strong effect size (p = 0.001, d = 0.935). In the INT, significantly more items were completed per minute of scenario duration (INT, 1.48 items/min; CON, 1.15 items/min, difference: 0.33/min (25%), p = 0.001), showing a large effect size (d = 1.11). The workflow did not significantly differ between the groups (p = 0.079), although a medium effect size was shown (d = 0.563) with the tendency of the CON group deviating stronger from the ABCDE than the INT. Checklists can have positive effects on outcome in the prehospital setting by significantly facilitates adherence to guidelines. Checklist use may be time-effective in the prehospital setting. Checklists based on the 'ABCDE' mnemonic can be used according to the 'do verify' approach. Team Time Outs are recommended to start and finish checklists.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Checklists are a powerful tool for reduction of mortality and morbidity. Checklists structure complex processes in a reproducible manner, optimize team interaction, and prevent errors related to human factors. Despite wide dissemination of the checklist, effects of checklist use in the prehospital emergency medicine are currently unclear. The aim of the study was to demonstrate that participants achieve higher adherence to guideline-recommended actions, manage the scenario more time-efficient, and thirdly demonstrate better adherence to the ABCDE-compliant workflow in a simulated ROSC situation.
METHODS
METHODS
CHIPS was a prospective randomized case-control study. Professional emergency medical service teams were asked to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation on an adult high-fidelity patient simulator achieving ROSC. The intervention group used a checklist which transferred the ERC guideline statements of ROSC into the structure of the 'ABCDE' mnemonic. Guideline adherence (performance score, PS), utilization of process time (items/minute) and workflow were measured by analyzing continuous A/V recordings of the simulation. Pre- and post-questionnaires addressing demographics and relevance of the checklist were recorded. Effect sizes were determined by calculating Cohen's d. The level of significance was defined at p < 0.05.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twenty scenarios in the intervention group (INT) and twenty-one in the control group (CON) were evaluated. The average time of use of the checklist (CU) in the INT was 6.32 min (2.39-9.18 min; SD = 2.08 min). Mean PS of INT was significantly higher than CON, with a strong effect size (p = 0.001, d = 0.935). In the INT, significantly more items were completed per minute of scenario duration (INT, 1.48 items/min; CON, 1.15 items/min, difference: 0.33/min (25%), p = 0.001), showing a large effect size (d = 1.11). The workflow did not significantly differ between the groups (p = 0.079), although a medium effect size was shown (d = 0.563) with the tendency of the CON group deviating stronger from the ABCDE than the INT.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Checklists can have positive effects on outcome in the prehospital setting by significantly facilitates adherence to guidelines. Checklist use may be time-effective in the prehospital setting. Checklists based on the 'ABCDE' mnemonic can be used according to the 'do verify' approach. Team Time Outs are recommended to start and finish checklists.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37978554
doi: 10.1186/s13049-023-01144-3
pii: 10.1186/s13049-023-01144-3
pmc: PMC10655407
doi:
Substances chimiques
D 935
41144-17-6
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
81Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 29;360(5):491-9
pubmed: 19144931
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2022 Jul 11;30(1):45
pubmed: 35820939
J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20
pubmed: 22179294
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2010;23(8):699-707
pubmed: 21125965
Resuscitation. 2021 Apr;161:115-151
pubmed: 33773825
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011 Oct 03;19:53
pubmed: 21967747
N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 28;355(26):2725-32
pubmed: 17192537
BMJ. 2016 May 03;353:i2139
pubmed: 27143499
Surg Endosc. 2009 Apr;23(4):715-26
pubmed: 18636292
N Engl J Med. 1991 Feb 7;324(6):370-6
pubmed: 1987460
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Dec;24(12):776-86
pubmed: 26199428
Anesthesiology. 2019 Jul;131(1):186-208
pubmed: 31021845
Int J Qual Health Care. 2008 Feb;20(1):22-30
pubmed: 18073269
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020 Feb;46(1):65-72
pubmed: 31392359
Resuscitation. 2010 Oct;81(10):1219-76
pubmed: 20956052
J Crit Care. 2006 Sep;21(3):231-5
pubmed: 16990087
Hosp Pediatr. 2017 Apr;7(4):225-231
pubmed: 28336579
Resuscitation. 2021 Apr;161:388-407
pubmed: 33773831
Resuscitation. 2021 Apr;161:152-219
pubmed: 33773826
Eur J Emerg Med. 2017 Apr;24(2):114-119
pubmed: 26287802
Circulation. 2010 Nov 2;122(18 Suppl 3):S768-86
pubmed: 20956225
Anesth Analg. 2006 Sep;103(3):551-6
pubmed: 16931660
Anesth Analg. 2005 Jul;101(1):246-50, table of contents
pubmed: 15976240
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012 Oct;109(42):695-701
pubmed: 23264813
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020 Dec;46(6):1321-1325
pubmed: 31079191
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 Jul;79(1):111-5; discussion 115-6
pubmed: 26091323