Deception and death in medical simulation.

From the Institute for Professionalism and Ethical Practice (R.D.T., E.C.M.), Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine (R.D.T.) and Department of Psychiatry (E.C.M), Boston Children's Hospital
Simulation in healthcare: journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare (Impact Factor: 1.59). 02/2013; 8(1):1-3. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3182869fc2
Source: PubMed
Download full-text


Available from: Elaine Meyer, Jun 21, 2015
1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anaesthetists may fail to recognize and manage certain rare intraoperative events. Simulation has been shown to be an effective educational adjunct to typical operating room-based education to train for these events. It is yet unclear, however, why simulation has any benefit. We hypothesize that learners who are allowed to manage a scenario independently and allowed to fail, thus causing simulated morbidity, will consequently perform better when re-exposed to a similar scenario. Using a randomized, controlled, observer-blinded design, 24 first-year residents were exposed to an oxygen pipeline contamination scenario, either where patient harm occurred (independent group, n=12) or where a simulated attending anaesthetist intervened to prevent harm (supervised group, n=12). Residents were brought back 6 months later and exposed to a different scenario (pipeline contamination) with the same end point. Participants' proper treatment, time to diagnosis, and non-technical skills (measured using the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills Checklist, ANTS) were measured. No participants provided proper treatment in the initial exposure. In the repeat encounter 6 months later, 67% in the independent group vs 17% in the supervised group resumed adequate oxygen delivery (P=0.013). The independent group also had better ANTS scores [median (interquartile range): 42.3 (31.5-53.1) vs 31.3 (21.6-41), P=0.015]. There was no difference in time to treatment if proper management was provided [602 (490-820) vs 610 (420-800) s, P=0.79]. Allowing residents to practise independently in the simulation laboratory, and subsequently, allowing them to fail, can be an important part of simulation-based learning. This is not feasible in real clinical practice but appears to have improved resident performance in this study. The purposeful use of independent practice and its potentially negative outcomes thus sets simulation-based learning apart from traditional operating room learning. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email:
    BJA British Journal of Anaesthesia 01/2015; 114(5). DOI:10.1093/bja/aeu457 · 4.35 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP)-generated morbidities used to create area under the receiver operator curves (AUROCs) are accurate for patients in an overall surgical model, predictive models for morbidity are marginal for laparoscopic and open abdominal colectomies. NSQIP risk models tend to emphasize comorbidities rather than intraoperative details or technical aspects of colonic resections.
    The Permanente journal 01/2014; 18(1):14-8. DOI:10.7812/TPP/12-133
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hierarchy, the unavoidable authority gradients that exist within and between clinical disciplines, can lead to significant patient harm in high-risk situations if not mitigated. High-fidelity simulation is a powerful means of addressing this issue in a reproducible manner, but participant psychological safety must be assured. Our institution experienced a hierarchy-related medication error that we subsequently addressed using simulation. The purpose of this article is to discuss the implementation and outcome of these simulations.
    The Permanente journal 01/2014; 18(2):14-20. DOI:10.7812/TPP/13-124