Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
, 17 (7), 605-14

Does Simulation Improve Recognition and Management of Pediatric Septic Shock, and If One Simulation Is Good, Is More Simulation Better?

Affiliations
Observational Study

Does Simulation Improve Recognition and Management of Pediatric Septic Shock, and If One Simulation Is Good, Is More Simulation Better?

Mark C Dugan et al. Pediatr Crit Care Med.

Abstract

Objectives: Determine whether serial simulation training sessions improve resident recognition and initial septic shock management in a critically ill simulated septic shock patient, and to determine whether serial simulations further improve resident task performance when compared with a single simulation session.

Design: Prospective observational cohort study with a live expert review of trainee simulation performance. Expert reviewers blinded to prior trainee performance.

Setting: A PICU room in a quaternary-care children's hospital, featuring a hi-fidelity pediatric patient simulator.

Subjects: Postgraduate year-2 and postgraduate year-3 pediatric residents who rotate through the PICU.

Interventions: Postgraduate year-3 residents as the control cohort, completing one simulation near the start of their third residency year. Postgraduate year-2 residents as the intervention cohort, completing two simulations during their second residency year and one near the start of their third residency year.

Measurements and main results: Resident objective performance was measured using a validated 27-item checklist (graded 0/1) related to monitoring, data gathering, and interventions in the diagnosis and management of pediatric septic shock. The intervention cohort had a higher mean performance percentage score during their third simulation than the control cohort completing their single simulation (87% vs 77%; p < 0.001). Septic shock was correctly diagnosed more often in the intervention cohort at the time of their third simulation (100% vs 78%; p < 0.001). Appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotics were administered correctly more often in the intervention cohort (83% vs 50%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Simulations significantly improved resident performance scores in the management of septic shock with repetitive simulation showing significant ongoing improvements. Further studies are needed to determine long-term impact on knowledge and skill retention and whether results attained in a simulation environment are translatable into clinical practice in improving bedside care.

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 3 articles

Publication types

Feedback