Article

Use of a Simulation Laboratory to Train Radiology Residents in the Management of Acute Radiologic Emergencies

Department of Radiology, Penn State Hershey Medical Center, 500 University Dr, H066, Hershey, PA 17033, USA.
American Journal of Roentgenology (Impact Factor: 2.74). 08/2012; 199(2):244-51. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7892
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Simulation laboratories use realistic clinical scenarios to train physicians in a controlled environment, especially in potentially life-threatening complications that require prompt management. The objective of our study was to develop a comprehensive program using the simulation laboratory to train radiology residents in the management of acute radiologic emergencies.
All radiology residents attended a dedicated simulation laboratory course lasting 3 hours, divided over two sessions. Training included basic patient management skills, management of a tension pneumothorax, massive hemorrhage, and contrast agent reactions. Participants were presented with 20 multiple-choice questions before and after the course. Pre- and posttest results were analyzed, and the McNemar test was used to compare correct responses by individual question.
Twenty-six radiology residents attended the class. The average pre- and posttest scores and the average difference between the scores for all residents were 13.8, 17.1, and 3.3, respectively (p < 0.0001). Incorrect answers on the pretest examination that were subsequently answered correctly concerned administration of epinephrine for severe reactions, management of a tension pneumothorax, oxygen therapy, ECG placement, cardiopulmonary resuscitation technique, and where to stand during a code situation. Persistent incorrect answers concerned vasovagal reactions and emergency telephone numbers at an off-site imaging center.
Simulation laboratories can be used to teach crisis management and crisis resource management for radiology residents and should be part of the education toolbox. Defined objectives lead to a comprehensive course dealing with the management of acute radiologic emergencies. Such programs can improve the role of radiologists as members of the health care team.

0 Followers
 · 
84 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Code teams respond to acute life threatening changes in a patient's status 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If any variable, whether a medical skill or non-medical quality, is lacking, the effectiveness of a code team's resuscitation could be hindered. To improve the overall performance of our hospital's code team, we implemented an evidence-based quality improvement restructuring plan. The code team restructure, which occurred over a 3-month period, included a defined number of code team participants, clear identification of team members and their primary responsibilities and position relative to the patient, and initiation of team training events and surprise mock codes (simulations). Team member assessments of the restructured code team and its performance were collected through self-administered electronic questionnaires. Time-to-defibrillation, defined as the time the code was called until the start of defibrillation, was measured for each code using actual time recordings from code summary sheets. Significant improvements in team member confidence in the skills specific to their role and clarity in their role's position were identified. Smaller improvements were seen in team leadership and reduction in the amount of extra talking and noise during a code. The average time-to-defibrillation during real codes decreased each year since the code team restructure. This type of code team restructure resulted in improvements in several areas that impact the functioning of the team, as well as decreased the average time-to-defibrillation, making it beneficial to many, including the team members, medical institution, and patients.
    Clinical Medicine &amp Research 03/2014; DOI:10.3121/cmr.2014.1201
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To determine the most common errors of epinephrine administration during severe allergic-like contrast reaction management using high-fidelity simulation surrogates. Materials and methods IRB approval and informed consent were obtained for this HIPAA-compliant bi-institutional prospective study of 40 radiology residents, fellows, and faculty who were asked to manage a structured high-fidelity severe allergic-like contrast reaction scenario (i.e., mild hives progressing to mild bronchospasm, then bronchospasm unresponsive to bronchodilators, and finally anaphylactic shock) on an interactive manikin. Intravenous (IV) and intramuscular epinephrine ampules were available to all participants, and the manikin had a functioning intravenous catheter for all scenarios. Video recordings of their performance were reviewed by experts in contrast reaction management, and errors in epinephrine administration were recorded and characterized. Results No participant (0/40) failed to give indicated epinephrine, but more than half (58% [23/40]) committed an error while doing so. The most common mistake was to administer epinephrine as the first-line treatment for mild bronchospasm (33% [13/40]). Other common errors were to administer IV epinephrine without a subsequent IV saline flush or concomitant IV fluids (25% [10/40]), administer an overdose of epinephrine (8% [3/40]), and administer epinephrine 1:1000 intravenously (8% [3/40]). Conclusion Epinephrine administration errors are common. Many radiologists fail to administer albuterol as the first-line treatment for mild bronchospasm and fail to flush the IV catheter when administering IV epinephrine. High-fidelity contrast reaction scenarios can be used to identify areas for training improvement.
    Abdominal Imaging 09/2014; 39(5):1127-1133. DOI:10.1007/s00261-014-0141-x · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • Article: Reply.
    American Journal of Roentgenology 05/2013; 200(5):W537. DOI:10.2214/AJR.12.10285 · 2.74 Impact Factor