Total amount: € 0,00
HOW TO ORDER
A Journal on Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, Analgesia and Intensive Care
Minerva Anestesiologica 2012 August;78(8):901-9
Impact of simulator training and crew resource management training on final-year medical students’ performance in sepsis resuscitation: a randomized trial
Hänsel M. 1, Winkelmann A. M. 1, Hardt F. 2, Gijselaers W. 3, Hacker W. 4, Stiehl M. 1, Koch T. 1, Müller M. P. 1 ✉
1 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital, University of Technology, Dresden, Germany;
2 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Bischofswerda Hospital, Bischofswerda, Germany;
3 Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Maastricht University, Maastricht The Netherlands;
4 Institute of Psychology, University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
BACKGROUND: We developed a 1.5 days crew resource management (CRM) course on situation awareness (SA) to improve the participants´ ability to recognise critical situations in crisis scenarios. Objective of the study was to evaluate the influence of the CRM course on SA and medical performance in crisis scenarios and to compare the results with the effects of a purely clinical simulator training.
METHODS: Sixty-one final-year medical students, randomized into three groups, took part in a pre-intervention test scenario of septic shock in a patient simulator setting. Medical performance and SA were assessed using a checklist and the Situation Awareness Global Assessment Tool (SAGAT), respectively. All students received a lecture about the sepsis guidelines. The simulator (SIM) group took part in a 1.5-day simulator training on sepsis resuscitation. The CRM group took part in a course on situation awareness. The control group (CG) did not obtain any training. All students accomplished a post-intervention test scenario comparable to the pre-intervention scenario.
RESULTS: The SAGAT score rose from 10.6±2.3 to 11.9±1.7 (preintervention vs. postintervention test, P=0.04) in the SIM group, whereas no significant changes could be shown in the CRM group and the control group, respectively. The clinical performance scores in the post-intervention test did not differ from those in the preintervention test.
CONCLUSION: Neither the 1.5 days simulator training nor the 1.5 days CRM course did influence the clinical performance scores. SAGAT scores were higher after the simulator training, but not after the CRM training.