Cargando…
Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training
OBJECTIVES: Pit crew models are designed to improve teamwork in critical medical situations, like advanced life support (ALS). We investigated if a pit crew model training improves performance assessment and ALS skills retention when compared to standard ALS education. METHODS: This was a prospectiv...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9110874/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35601649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12721 |
_version_ | 1784709199827042304 |
---|---|
author | Peltonen, Ville Peltonen, Laura‐Maria Rantanen, Matias Säämänen, Jari Vänttinen, Olli Koskela, Jaana Perkonoja, Katariina Salanterä, Sanna Tommila, Miretta |
author_facet | Peltonen, Ville Peltonen, Laura‐Maria Rantanen, Matias Säämänen, Jari Vänttinen, Olli Koskela, Jaana Perkonoja, Katariina Salanterä, Sanna Tommila, Miretta |
author_sort | Peltonen, Ville |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Pit crew models are designed to improve teamwork in critical medical situations, like advanced life support (ALS). We investigated if a pit crew model training improves performance assessment and ALS skills retention when compared to standard ALS education. METHODS: This was a prospective, blinded, randomized, and controlled, parallel‐group trial. We recruited students to 4‐person resuscitation teams. We video recorded simulated ALS‐situations after the ALS education and after 6‐month follow‐up. We analyzed technical skills (TS) and non‐technical skills (NTS) demonstrated in them with an instrument measuring TS and NTS, and used a linear mixed model to model the difference between the groups in the TS and NTS. Another linear model was used to explore the difference between the groups in hands‐on ratio and hands‐free time. The difference in the total assessment score was analyzed with the Mann‐Whitney U‐test. The primary outcome was the difference in the total assessment score between the groups at follow‐up. ALS skills were considered to be a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Twenty‐six teams underwent randomization. Twenty‐two teams received the allocated education. Fifteen teams were evaluated at 6‐month follow‐up: 7 in the intervention group and 8 in the control group. At 6‐month follow‐up, the median (Q(1)–Q(3)) total assessment score for the control group was 6.5 (6–8) and 7 (6.25–8) for the intervention group but the difference was not significant (U = 133, P = 0.373). The intervention group performed better in terms of chest compression quality (interaction term, β3 = 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.01–0.50; P = 0.043) at follow‐up. CONCLUSION: We found no difference in overall performance between the study arms. However, trends indicate that the pit crew model may help to retain ALS skills in different areas like chest compression quality. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9110874 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91108742022-05-20 Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training Peltonen, Ville Peltonen, Laura‐Maria Rantanen, Matias Säämänen, Jari Vänttinen, Olli Koskela, Jaana Perkonoja, Katariina Salanterä, Sanna Tommila, Miretta J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open Evidence‐Based Emergency Medicine OBJECTIVES: Pit crew models are designed to improve teamwork in critical medical situations, like advanced life support (ALS). We investigated if a pit crew model training improves performance assessment and ALS skills retention when compared to standard ALS education. METHODS: This was a prospective, blinded, randomized, and controlled, parallel‐group trial. We recruited students to 4‐person resuscitation teams. We video recorded simulated ALS‐situations after the ALS education and after 6‐month follow‐up. We analyzed technical skills (TS) and non‐technical skills (NTS) demonstrated in them with an instrument measuring TS and NTS, and used a linear mixed model to model the difference between the groups in the TS and NTS. Another linear model was used to explore the difference between the groups in hands‐on ratio and hands‐free time. The difference in the total assessment score was analyzed with the Mann‐Whitney U‐test. The primary outcome was the difference in the total assessment score between the groups at follow‐up. ALS skills were considered to be a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Twenty‐six teams underwent randomization. Twenty‐two teams received the allocated education. Fifteen teams were evaluated at 6‐month follow‐up: 7 in the intervention group and 8 in the control group. At 6‐month follow‐up, the median (Q(1)–Q(3)) total assessment score for the control group was 6.5 (6–8) and 7 (6.25–8) for the intervention group but the difference was not significant (U = 133, P = 0.373). The intervention group performed better in terms of chest compression quality (interaction term, β3 = 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.01–0.50; P = 0.043) at follow‐up. CONCLUSION: We found no difference in overall performance between the study arms. However, trends indicate that the pit crew model may help to retain ALS skills in different areas like chest compression quality. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9110874/ /pubmed/35601649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12721 Text en © 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Evidence‐Based Emergency Medicine Peltonen, Ville Peltonen, Laura‐Maria Rantanen, Matias Säämänen, Jari Vänttinen, Olli Koskela, Jaana Perkonoja, Katariina Salanterä, Sanna Tommila, Miretta Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
title | Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
title_full | Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
title_fullStr | Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
title_full_unstemmed | Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
title_short | Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
title_sort | randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training |
topic | Evidence‐Based Emergency Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9110874/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35601649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12721 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT peltonenville randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT peltonenlauramaria randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT rantanenmatias randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT saamanenjari randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT vanttinenolli randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT koskelajaana randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT perkonojakatariina randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT salanterasanna randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining AT tommilamiretta randomizedcontrolledtrialcomparingpitcrewresuscitationmodelagainststandardadvancedlifesupporttraining |