Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 868 - файл
.pdf
14 Teamwork andCommunication Simulation toImprove Safety intheOR
https://t.me/med1917
241
[61]. By virtue of a shared experience, barriers to communication among team
members break down. Rehearsing working together and recognizing one another’s
contributions in a simulation environment translates readily into clinical practice.
Indeed, studies in obstetrics and elsewhere have shown improved objective team
performance following multidisciplinary simulation [59].
The acquisition and practice of technical skills in the perioperative environment
come with inherent procedural risks. Surgical personnel, and anesthesia providers
and nurses each have opportunities to improve their skills in the simulation laboratory prior to and in parallel to clinical practice. As mentioned previously, simulation
studies have shown improvement in both open and laparoscopic surgical skills by
surgical trainees [37, 38]. Anesthesia medical students and residents improve their
advanced airway management skills using both hands-on and computerized simulation [34, 36]. Novice and veteran scrub nurses have benetted from a virtual reality
simulator to improve procedural skills [73]. Perfusionists may utilize simulation
software to improve technical skills related to volume management, vasopressor
titration, and warming/cooling kinetics [74].
Simulation can also be used for assessment of performance at all levels of experience. This has a clear patient safety relationship by ensuring competence of trainees, continuing competence of providers at intervals along their career, and for
re-entry of providers who have left practice for various reasons and now wish to
return. Assessment of performance itself is a complex topic. Simulation-based
assessments have been examined for many years [75, 76]. Developing an assessment that is psychometrically robust, appropriately realistic and salient, and practical to implement is challenging. Recent studies have demonstrated that such
simulations can be employed, but that many repeat scenarios are required to ensure
test reliability [77]. Still, as noted earlier, simulation-based, high-stakes (passing
required to obtain a license or to practice) are now used at some stage of training or
practice for most perioperative healthcare providers.
Another less widely used application of simulation in healthcare is as a part of
root cause analysis (RCA) or a failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA). [78] RCA
and FMEA are processes adapted from other industries. RCA is now applied widely
in healthcare to learn about the causes of adverse events. More recently, another A,
for action, has been added (RCA2) to focus the process on creating interventions
that will at least reduce, if not eliminate, the occurrence of future events that are
similar to the one being studied [79, 80]. RCA is now widely practiced in healthcare. FMEA is less widely employed.
There are various structured guidelines for conducting an RCA.The general idea
is straightforward: Assemble a team of appropriately experienced people, conduct
interviews with the people involved in the event, plot out the elements of the event
(using one or more of various tools, for example, owcharting, shbone diagram,
asking “5 whys”), consider various ways in which it could have been prevented,
suggest and take action to implement specic interventions, and then follow through
to ensure changes have been made for the positive. Simulation has great potential
utility as part of the RCA2 process, but it is now only rarely utilized in healthcare for
this purpose [81].
242
https://t.me/med1917
On the surface, using simulation to investigate an event is not complicated. A
reenactment of the event can be created in an existing simulation facility or in situ.
Ideally, the actual cast of participants in the event would be assembled. They would
previously have been prepared and given assurance of condentiality and psychological safety. They would discuss antecedent factors and then step through, reenact,
the events that actually took place, pausing to discuss their various views on what
happened. Reenactment may be video recorded for re-analysis. Ideally, this process
would reveal aspects of the causes and, hopefully, future prevention of the event that
otherwise would not be discovered by the normal process.
In reality, this process is not so simple. Having the original team reenact the
event together could cause psychological harm and exacerbate any conict about
what happened or placing blame. The possibility of this must be considered and
explored before conducting the reenactment. The logistics and scheduling of people
and place to conduct a reenactment can be challenging. Facilitating such an event
requires skill and insight of the investigation leader and team. And, the time and
expense of this additional process can be substantial. Thus, it should only be done
when the normal process is not likely sufcient to intensify critical causes that could
add to the prevention strategy or tactics.
Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) is similar to RCA but is applied before
potential events, preferably before any new patient care process is implemented. In
FMEA, the new process is mapped out, for example, in a ow chart of the steps, and
potential failure points are identied, with each point being assigned an estimated
value for its likelihood of occurrence and potential severity of outcome. The team
will then work on ameliorating those potential failure modes that are of highest
priority.
Similar to an RCA, simulation can be—but to date is rarely—used to test out
processes, including to identify what are called “latent safety threats” [62, 82]. So
doing almost invariably identies potential failure modes that were not identied in
the pseudo-simulation conducted only with the imagination of the process designers, even when actual clinicians are involved. Like RCA, FMEA requires time and
money and can delay implementation of a new process. So, it should be used selectively. And it can be used for existing processes that are known to have failure
modes. This has been demonstrated successfully in labor and delivery [83].
Simulation is also used to train in the use of RCA and could be used for FMEA
training as well [84].
J. L. Sparling and J. B. Cooper
Measuring Success
Simulation programs have been evaluated in a number of ways; these metrics
largely fall into process metrics, outcomes metrics, and balance metrics [85].
Process metrics measure whether the simulation program is proceeding as
planned. This could be a measure of how many clinicians have participated in a
given program. Outcome metrics assess the impact of a given simulation program. For example, simulation for technical skills can be evaluated with a preand post-simulation standardized assessment; however, these assessment tools
14 Teamwork andCommunication Simulation toImprove Safety intheOR
https://t.me/med1917
should be validated and have high inter-rater reliability. In addition to these
objective measures, participants are often asked to rate their condence with
specic scenarios or skills before versus after a simulation. Finally, the ultimate
outcome of simulation is an improvement in patient safety, so measures could
include a reduction in adverse events or objective measures of improved teamwork during actual crises. Balance metrics assess whether an improvement in
one part of the system causes new problems in another area of the system. For
simulation, balance metrics may look at the cost effectiveness of implementing a
new program or may measure time spent away from the operating room or other
educational endeavors.
243
Implementation
Implementation of a medical simulation program requires leadership and structural
elements to be put into place. Kotter’s 8-Step Process for Leading Change can be
used as a model for implementing change, as in developing a new simulation program [86]. One of the rst steps entails the building of a “guiding coalition” which
translates to developing a multidisciplinary team of invested clinicians across different disciplines and specialties to lead the implementation efforts. It is important in
this coalition to have the commitment of senior leadership to have the power to
dedicate resources, as well as the political capital to inspire others to “buy-in” to the
simulation program. While some types of simulation may be implemented with little upfront capital costs, the time commitment is warranted in all scenarios, and
senior leadership must invest in this to demonstrate institutional support for the
program. Capital investment may be required in other types of simulation, from
building or adapting a dedicated facility to the purchase of simulator mannequins
and other equipment. Retired or expired clinical equipment often can be utilized to
minimize the cost of implementation and reduce clinical waste.
Building a simulation facility is the relatively easier part of building an effective
program. Operations, instructor, and other personnel must be selected and trained to
run and facilitate simulations. The process and issues in hiring and training operations staff is not dissimilar to other types of hospital or healthcare educational
school programs. Identifying and training instructors usually presents a greater
challenge. Clinical acumen and educational skills are required, as they are for any
healthcare professional educator. Simulation-based education has some unique
aspects that make it more difcult to attract and sufciently train educators to use
simulation effectively. Much of simulation-based training calls for creating a nonthreatening environment, presenting students with direct, objective evidence of their
performance, and doing so in the presence of their colleagues. Furthermore, since
simulation often requires a commitment, sometimes unpaid or less highly paid than
clinical work, attracting clinicians to work in a simulation environment can be difcult. And not all are well suited to doing it.
Fortunately, numerous training courses exist for simulation educators at all levels of experience and directed to the various types of healthcare simulation; these
are detailed below. Ongoing commitment by the institution requires that
244
https://t.me/med1917
participants have dedicated time away from clinical care to engage in simulation in
a focused fashion—this may form an element of both upfront training and ongoing
certication. Finally, metrics, including those above, must be tracked over time to
ensure ongoing adherence to the program and quality of the simulations delivered.
J. L. Sparling and J. B. Cooper
Role ofSimulation inHealthcare Regulation
With the growing body of evidence for the success of simulation in improving
patient safety, it is natural for simulation to become incorporated into regulatory and
certication requirements for healthcare providers [87]. Physicians in both general
surgical and anesthesiology training are required to complete simulation exercises
in order to become board-eligible. The American College of Surgeons (ACS)
requires surgery residents to complete the Resident Skills Curriculum, which
includes simulations to teach Core Surgical Skills (16 modules), Advanced
Procedures (15 modules), and Team-Based Skills (10 modules) [88]. The American
Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) requires simulation activities for both initial certication and maintenance of certication. The initial certication requires completion of an Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) with standardized patient
actors and simulated technical skills. Simulation for MOCA® (Maintenance of
Certication in Anesthesiology) is only optional but offers 3h of credit for each
hour of participation, which is an incentive, versus some other options for attaining
the required points every 5years [89, 90]. The MOCA® simulation only requires
participation; there is no assessment of performance. Additional points can be
claimed for providing a self-determined performance improvement plan and reporting back about the progress in achieving it.
Further, malpractice insurers may provide incentives for providers to participate
in team-based simulation for the purpose of patient safety [87, 91]. CRICO, the
malpractice insurance program for all Harvard Medical School-afliated hospitals
and physicians, offers substantially lower malpractice insurance premiums for anesthesiologists, surgeons, and obstetricians who participate in a program that includes
multidisciplinary, team-based high-realism simulations that focus on communication, assertiveness, and the use of the World Health Organization surgical safety
checklist. Each simulation involves at least one attending surgeon, one attending
anesthesiologist, and one operating room nurse [63].
Current Status ofSimulation inPerioperative Care
Simulation is increasingly being used for both task and team training worldwide, and
the number of medical simulation centers is growing. The Society for Simulation in
Healthcare (SSH), established in 2004, is an international organization of physicians,
nurses, allied health personnel, researchers, and educators dedicated to the use of
simulation to improve performance and reduce errors in healthcare [1]. The SSH has
certication for individuals and for simulation programs. For individuals, certication
14 Teamwork andCommunication Simulation toImprove Safety intheOR
https://t.me/med1917
allows for specializing either in simulation education, for which there are different
levels of certication, or in operations. Certication of various types is available for
simulation programs, an opportunity to evaluate and build on the program’s outcomes,
research, education, and systems integration. The SSH website lists 493 centers in the
United States alone, and more than 600 worldwide. More than 2000 individuals have
completed certication and more than 100 programs have been accredited [92].
Several other organizations also support simulation in healthcare, including the
Association for Simulated Practice in Healthcare (ASPiH), the Association of
Standardized Patient Educators (ASPE), the International Nursing Association for
Clinical Simulation (INACSL), and the International Pediatric Simulation Society
(IPSS) [93–96].
The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) has a Simulation Education
Network (SEN), which offers endorsement for programs seeking to teach courses
for Maintenance of Certication in Anesthesiology® (MOCA®; an optional element
of the required Part IV recertication), hosts an annual simulation summit, and has
other initiatives and programs to foster simulation in that specialty [97]. Similarly,
the American College of Surgeons (ACS) founded the Accredited Education
Institutes (AEIs) with the goal of educating and training surgeons and trainees using
simulation [97, 98]. The ACS-AEI offers accreditation of surgical education programs that use simulation and hosts an annual Surgical Simulation Summit. The
ACS-AEI and the ASA-SEN had their rst joint meeting in 2020, and meet annually. In 2023, their focus was specically on using simulation to improve quality
and safety.
Simulation instructor training is widely available, through both in-person courses
and online programs [99]. Through programs like these, instructors gain valuable
skills in creating safe learning environments, teaching teamwork skills and critical
thinking, debrieng, developing simulation scenarios, and in implementing simulation programs at their own institution. Participation and ongoing practice in simulation facilitation and teaching can lead to certication as a Certied Healthcare
Simulator Educator (CHSE) through the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
(SSH), as above. Certication requires an application including a condential
assessment of the candidates’ performance, and completion of a structured, computerized examination [100].
245
Conclusion
In the future, we expect simulation to grow in the perioperative eld, fueled by
enthusiasm and demands for improved healthcare safety from the public, government payors, accrediting organizations, and others. Ideally, not only will we reach a
point where all healthcare providers train and certify prior to entering clinical practice, but simulation will also likely become “embedded in the fabric of care.” [69]
Simulation will be embraced by clinical educators and practicing clinicians and will
increasingly become a component of certication and accreditation. We will
246
https://t.me/med1917
J. L. Sparling and J. B. Cooper
regularly train for teamwork, focusing not on individual performance, but on cohesive function as a team.
As simulation becomes further integrated into healthcare, we expect the literature base to support its ongoing use. In the meantime, we rely on the growing evidence referenced in this chapter to inform the propagation of simulation, as well as
the high face-value validity.
References
1. Society for Simulation in Healthcare. About simulation 2019. https://www.ssih.org/About-
SSH/About- Simulation. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
2. Gaba DM.The future vision of simulation in health care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13(Suppl
1):i2–10.
3. Federal Aviation Administration. Flight simulation training device qualication guidance.
2019. https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/nsp/ac/. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
4. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Simulation facilities. https://www.nrc.gov/reading- rm/doc-
collections/cfr/part055/part055- 0046.html. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
5. Owen H. Simulation in healthcare: an extensive history. Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing; 2016.
6. Cooper JB, Taqueti VR.A brief history of the development of mannequin simulators for clinical education and training. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13((Suppl 1):i11–8.
7. Denson JS, Abrahamson S. A computer-controlled patient simulator. JAMA.
1969;208(3):504–8.
8. Jones FP-NC, Braghiroli OF.Simulation in medical education: brief history and methodology.
Principles Pract Clin Res. 2015;1(2):56–63.
9. Cooper JB, Newbower RS, Long CD, McPeek B.Preventable anesthesia mishaps: a study of
human factors. Anesthesiology. 1978;49(6):399–406.
10. Rosen KR.The history of medical simulation. J Crit Care. 2008;23(2):157–66.
11. Piemme TE. Computer-assisted learning and evaluation in medicine.
JAMA. 1988;260(3):367–72.
12. Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation. About APSF. https://www.apsf.org/about- apsf/
foundation- history/. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
13. Rehder R, Abd-El-Barr M, Hooten K, Weinstock P, Madsen JR, Cohen AR.The role of simulation in neurosurgery. Childs Nerv Sys. 2016;32(1):43–54.
14. Beall DP. The ACGME institutional requirements: what residents need to know.
JAMA. 1999;281(24):2352C.
15. Kurashima Y, Hirano S.Systematic review of the implementation of simulation training in
surgical residency curriculum. Surg Today. 2017;47(7):777–82.
16. Kazan R, Cyr S, Hemmerling TM, Lin SJ, Gilardino MS.The evolution of surgical simulation: the current state and future avenues for plastic surgery education. Plast Reconstr Surg.
2017;139(2):533e–43e.
17. Benner P.Educating nurses: a call for radical transformation-how far have we come? J Nurs
Educ. 2012;51(4):183–4.
18. Aebersold M, Tschannen D.Simulation in nursing practice: the impact on patient care. Online
J Issues Nurs. 2013;18(2):6.
19. Aebersold M.The history of simulation and its impact on the future. AACN Adv Crit Care.
2016;27(1):56–61.
20. Leonard M, Graham S, Bonacum D.The human factor: the critical importance of effective
teamwork and communication in providing safe care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13(Suppl
1):i85–90.
21. Arriaga AF, Sweeney RE, Clapp JT, Muralidharan M, Burson RC 2nd, Gordon EKB, etal.
Failure to debrief after critical events in anesthesia is associated with failures in communication during the event. Anesthesiology. 2019;130(6):1039–48.
14 Teamwork andCommunication Simulation toImprove Safety intheOR
https://t.me/med1917
22. Farnan JM, Paro JA, Rodriguez RM, Reddy ST, Horwitz LI, Johnson JK, etal. Hand-off education and evaluation: piloting the observed simulated hand-off experience (OSHE). J Gen
Intern Med. 2010;25(2):129–34.
23. Filichia L, Halan S, Blackwelder E, Rossen B, Lok B, Korndorffer J, etal. Description of
web-enhanced virtual character simulation system to standardize patient hand-offs. J Surg Res.
2011;166(2):176–81.
24. Elgin KW, Poston RD.Optimizing registered nurse bedside shift report: innovative application
of simulation methods. J Nurs Prof Dev. 2019;35(2):E6–e14.
25. Gaba DM, Howard SK, Fish KJ, Smith BE, Sowb YA.Simulation-based training in anesthesia crisis resource management (ACRM): a decade of experience. Simul Gaming.
2001;32(2):175–93.
26. Morey JC, Simon R, Jay GD, Wears RL, Salisbury M, Dukes KA, etal. Error reduction and
performance improvement in the emergency department through formal teamwork training:
evaluation results of the MedTeams project. Health Serv Res. 2002;37(6):1553–81.
27. Keebler JR, Lynch I, Ngo F, et al. ECHO ICU collaborative. Leveraging the science of teamwork to sustain handoff improvements in cardiovascular surgery. Jt Comm J Qual Patient
Saf. 2023;49(8):373–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.05.006. Epub 2023 Jun 1. PMID:
37357132.
28. Gaba DM, DeAnda A.A comprehensive anesthesia simulation environment: re-creating the
operating room for research and training. Anesthesiology. 1988;69(3):387–94.
29. Willie C, Chen F, Joyner BL, Blasius K.Using high-delity simulation for critical event training. Med Educ. 2016;50(11):1161–2.
30. Park CS, Rochlen LR, Yaghmour E, Higgins N, Bauchat JR, Wojciechowski KG, et al.
Acquisition of critical intraoperative event management skills in novice anesthesiology residents by using high-delity simulation-based training. Anesthesiology. 2010;112(1):202–11.
31. Jung EY, Park DK, Lee YH, Jo HS, Lim YS, Park RW.Evaluation of practical exercises using
an intravenous simulator incorporating virtual reality and haptics device technologies. Nurs
Educ Today. 2012;32(4):458–63.
32. Laack TA, Dong Y, Goyal DG, Sadosty AT, Suri HS, Dunn WF. Short-term and long-term
impact of the central line workshop on resident clinical performance during simulated central
line placement. Simul Healthc. 2014;9(4):228–33.
33. Gerolemou L, Fidellaga A, Rose K, Cooper S, Venturanza M, Aqeel A, etal. Simulation-based
training for nurses in sterile techniques during central vein catheterization. Am J Crit Care.
2014;23(1):40–8.
34. Kennedy CC, Cannon EK, Warner DO, Cook DA.Advanced airway management simulation training in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med.
2014;42(1):169–78.
35. Kovatch KJ, Harvey RS, Schechtman SA, Healy DW, Malloy KM, Prince MEP, etal. Integrated
otolaryngology-anesthesiology clinical skills and simulation rotation: a novel 1-month intern
curriculum. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2019;128(8):715–20.
36. Pastis NJ, Tobin CD, Wolf BJ, Reves JG, Schaefer JJ.A pilot study of simulation training in
difcult bag mask ventilation using a computerized patient simulator. J Med Educ Curric Dev.
2019;6:2382120519834327.
37. Mace RC, Webel AD, Nesbitt JC, Fann JI, Hicks GL, Feins RH. "Boot camp" simulator
training in open hilar dissection in early cardiothoracic surgical residency. Ann Thorac Surg.
2014;97(1):161–6.
38. Gawad N, Zevin B, Bonrath EM, Dedy NJ, Louridas M, Grantcharov TP.Introduction of a
comprehensive training curriculum in laparoscopic surgery for medical students: a randomized
trial. Surgery. 2014;156(3):698–706.
39. Ballard G, Piper S, Stokes P.Effect of simulated learning on blood pressure measurement
skills. Nurs Stand. 2012;27(8):43–7.
40. Nakazato T, Callahan Z, Kuchta K, Linn JG, Joehl RJ, Ujiki MB.A 1-day simulation-based
boot camp for incoming general surgery residents improves condence and technical skills.
Surgery. 2019;166(4):572–9.
247
248
https://t.me/med1917
41. Friedrich U, Backhaus J, Zipper CT, Konig S, Mavroveli S, Wiegering A, etal. Validation and
educational impact study of the NANEP high-delity simulation model for open preperitoneal
mesh repair of umbilical hernia. Hernia. 2020;24(4):873–81.
42. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat AH, Dellinger EP, et al. A surgical
safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. New Engl J Med.
2009;360(5):491–9.
43. Hepner DL, Arriaga AF, Cooper JB, Goldhaber-Fiebert SN, Gaba DM, Berry WR,
et al. Operating room crisis checklists and emergency manuals. Anesthesiology.
2017;127(2):384–92.
44. Howard SK, Goldhaber-Fiebert SN, Gaba DM, Harrison TK.Emergency manual implementation collaborative. Creative Commons BY-NC-ND; 2019. http://emergencymanual.stanford.
edu/emic.html. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
45. Methangkool E, Tollinche L, Sparling J, Agarwala AV. Communication: is there a standard
handover technique to transfer patient care? Int Anesthesiol Clin. 2019;57(3):35–47.
46. Barbeito A, Agarwala AV, Lorinc A. Handovers in perioperative care. Anesthesiol Clin.
2018;36(1):87–98.
47. Segall N, Bonifacio AS, Schroeder RA, Barbeito A, Rogers D, Thornlow DK, etal. Can we
make postoperative patient handovers safer? A systematic review of the literature. Anesth
Analg. 2012;115(1):102–15.
48. Petrovic MA, Martinez EA, Aboumatar H. Implementing a perioperative handoff tool to
improve postprocedural patient transfers. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2012;38(3):135–42.
49. Joy BF, Elliott E, Hardy C, Sullivan C, Backer CL, Kane JM.Standardized multidisciplinary
protocol improves handover of cardiac surgery patients to the intensive care unit. Pediatr Crit
Care Med. 2011;12(3):304–8.
50. Agarwala AV, Lane-Fall MB, Greilich PE, Burden AR, Ambardekar AP, Banerjee A, etal.
Consensus recommendations for the conduct, training, implementation, and research of perioperative handoffs. Anesth Analg. 2019;128(5):e71–e8.
51. DiCuccio MH.The relationship between patient safety culture and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J Patient Saf. 2015;11(3):135–42.
52. Singer S, Lin S, Falwell A, Gaba D, Baker L.Relationship of safety climate and safety performance in hospitals. Health Serv Res. 2009;44(2 Pt 1):399–421.
53. Cooper JB, Blum RH, Carroll JS, Dershwitz M, Feinstein DM, Gaba DM, etal. Differences in
safety climate among hospital anesthesia departments and the effect of a realistic simulationbased training program. Anesth Analg. 2008;106(2):574–84, table of contents.
54. Hicks CM, Bandiera GW, Denny CJ.Building a simulation-based crisis resource management
course for emergency medicine, phase 1: results from an interdisciplinary needs assessment
survey. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):1136–43.
55. Toy S, McKay RS, Walker JL, Johnson S, Arnett JL.Using learner-centered, simulationbased training to improve medical students’ procedural skills. J Med Educ Curric Dev.
2017;4:2382120516684829.
56. United States Medical Licensing Examination—Step 2 CS. https://www.usmle.org/step- 2- cs/
[cited 8 August 2019].
57. Lobos AT, Ward N, Farion KJ, Creery D, Fitzgibbons C, Ramsay C, etal. Simulation-based
event analysis improves error discovery and generates improved strategies for error prevention. Simul Healthc. 2019;14(4):209–16.
58. Bilgic E, Alya M, Hada T, Landry T, Fried GM, Vassiliou MC.Simulation platforms to assess
laparoscopic suturing skills: a scoping review. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(9):2742–62.
59. Merien AE, van de Ven J, Mol BW, Houterman S, Oei SG.Multidisciplinary team training
in a simulation setting for acute obstetric emergencies: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol.
2010;115(5):1021–31.
60. Cumin D, Boyd MJ, Webster CS, Weller JM.A systematic review of simulation for multidisciplinary team training in operating rooms. Simul Healthc. 2013;8(3):171–9.
61. Meeker K, Brown SK, Lamping M, Moyer MR, Dienger MJ.A high-delity human patient
simulation initiative to enhance communication and teamwork among a maternity care team.
Nurs Womens Health. 2018;22(6):454–62.
J. L. Sparling and J. B. Cooper
14 Teamwork andCommunication Simulation toImprove Safety intheOR
https://t.me/med1917
62. Rodriguez-Paz JM, Mark LJ, Herzer KR, Michelson JD, Grogan KL, Herman J, etal. A novel
process for introducing a new intraoperative program: a multidisciplinary paradigm for mitigating hazards and improving patient safety. Anesth Analg. 2009;108(1):202–10.
63. Arriaga AF, Gawande AA, Raemer DB, Jones DB, Smink DS, Weinstock P, et al. Pilot testing
of a model for insurer-driven, large-scale multicenter simulation training for operating room
teams. Ann Surg. 2014;259(3):403–10.
64. Fanning RM, Gaba DM.The role of debrieng in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc.
2007;2(2):115–25.
65. Mitchell JT, Everly GS Jr. Critical incident stress debrieng (CISD): an operations manual for
the prevention of traumatic stress among emergency services and disaster workers. Ellicott
City, MD: Chevron Publishing Cooperation; 1993. Dyregrov A, editor.
66. Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-Fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A.More than one way to debrief: a critical review of healthcare simulation debrieng methods. Simul Healthc. 2016;11(3):209–17.
67. Center for Medical Simulation. Debrieng Assessment for simulation in Healthcare©
(DASH). https://harvardmedsim.org/debrieng- assessment- for- simulation- in- healthcare-
dash/. Accessed 12 Aug 2019.
68. Parsons JR, Crichlow A, Ponnuru S, Shewokis PA, Goswami V, Griswold S.Filling the gap:
simulation-based crisis resource management training for emergency medicine residents. West
J Emerg Med. 2018;19(1):205–10.
69. Boet S, Bould MD, Fung L, Qosa H, Perrier L, Tavares W, et al. Transfer of learning and
patient outcome in simulated crisis resource management: a systematic review. Can J Anaesth.
2014;61(6):571–82.
70. Howard SK, Gaba DM, Fish KJ, Yang G, Sarnquist FH.Anesthesia crisis resource management training: teaching anesthesiologists to handle critical incidents. Aviat Space Environ
Med. 1992;63(9):763–70.
71. David MG. Crisis management in anesthesiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier/
Saunders; 2015.
72. American Society of Anesthesiologists. Anesthesia SimSTAT. https://www.asahq.org/
education- and- career/educational- and- cme- offerings/simulation- education/anesthesiasimstat?gclid=Cj0KCQjw- b7qBRDPARIsADVbUbUKL7er5e6vnCW06lp9qsOdJOCwrMCWkwSUK2vjPGbrfpFBb9xPLUaAnUfEALw_wcB&ct=09d972537711f8c1f49a46af8282e
3dbd72a10961bd67c585d76a1afd5e7869eae166213b21cf9dc55821e36827a7115bd6cda6cb6
1e0a9f4b764d61a8b3560c. Accessed 12 Aug 2019.
73. Bracq MS, Michinov E, Arnaldi B, Caillaud B, Gibaud B, Gouranton V, et al. Learning
procedural skills with a virtual reality simulator: an acceptability study. Nurs Educ Today.
2019;79:153–60.
74. Morris RW, Pybus DA. “Orpheus” cardiopulmonary bypass simulation system. J Extra Corpor
Technol. 2007;39(4):228–33.
75. Murray DJ, Boulet JR, Avidan M, Kras JF, Henrichs B, Woodhouse J, et al. Performance
of residents and anesthesiologists in a simulation-based skill assessment. Anesthesiology.
2007;107(5):705–13.
76. Mudumbai SC, Gaba DM, Boulet JR, Howard SK, Davies MF. External validation of
simulation- based assessments with other performance measures of third-year anesthesiology
residents. Simul Healthc. 2012;7(2):73–80.
77. Weinger MB, Banerjee A, Burden AR, McIvor WR, Boulet J, Cooper JB, etal. Simulationbased assessment of the management of critical events by board-certied anesthesiologists.
Anesthesiology. 2017;127(3):475–89.
78. Shaqdan K, Aran S, Daftari Besheli L, Abujudeh H.Root-cause analysis and health failure
mode and effect analysis: two leading techniques in health care quality assessment. J Am Coll
Radiol. 2014;11(6):572–9.
79. Charles R, Hood B, DeRosier JM, Gosbee JW, Bagian JP, Li Y, etal. Root cause analysis
and actions for the prevention of medical errors: quality improvement and resident education.
Orthopedics. 2017;40(4):e628–e35.
249
250
https://t.me/med1917
80. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. RCA2: improving root cause analyses and actions
to prevent harm. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/RCA2- Improving- Root- Cause-
Analyses- and- Actions- to- Prevent- Harm.aspx
81. Slakey DP, Simms ER, Rennie KV, Garstka ME, Korndorffer JR Jr. Using simulation
to improve root cause analysis of adverse surgical outcomes. Int J Qual Health Care.
2014;26(2):144–50.
82. Jafri FN, Yang CJ, Kumar A, Torres RE, Ahmed ST, Seneviratne N, et al. In Situ Simulation
as a Tool to Longitudinally Identify and Track Latent Safety Threats in a Structured Quality
Improvement Initiative for SARS-CoV-2 Airway Management Simulation in Healthcare:
The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare. 2023;18(1):16–23. https://doi.
org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000633.
83. Ventre KM, Barry JS, Davis D, Baiamonte VL, Wentworth AC, Pietras M, etal. Using in situ
simulation to evaluate operational readiness of a children's hospital-based obstetrics unit.
Simul Healthc. 2014;9(2):102–11.
84. Quraishi SA, Kimatian SJ, Murray WB, Sinz EH.High-delity simulation as an experiential
model for teaching root cause analysis. J Grad Med Educ. 2011;3(4):529–34.
85. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Science of improvement: establishing measures. www.
ihi.org. Accessed 12 Aug 2019.
86. Kotter JP.Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Bus Rev. 1995:59–67.
87. Holmboe E, Rizzolo MA, Sachdeva AK, Rosenberg M, Ziv A.Simulation-based assessment
and the regulation of healthcare professionals. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(Suppl):S58–62.
88. American College of Surgeons. ACS/APDS surgery resident skills curriculum. https://www.
facs.org/education/program/resident- skills. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
89. American Board of Anesthesiology. About APPLIED (staged exams). https://www.theaba.
org/TRAINING- PROGRAMS/APPLIED- (Staged- Exam)/About- APPLIED- (Staged- Exam).
Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
90. The American Board of Anesthesiology. About MOCA. https://www.theaba.org/MOCA/
Physician- s- Requirements. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
91. Hanscom R. Medical simulation from an insurer’s perspective. Acad Emerg Med.
2008;15(11):984–7.
92. Society for Simulation in Healthcare. Center directory. https://www.ssih.org/Home/SIM-
Center- Directory. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
93. Association for Simulated Practice in Healthcare. https://aspih.org.uk/. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
94. Association of Standardized Patient Educators. https://www.aspeducators.org/. Accessed 8
Aug 2019.
95. International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning. https://www.inacsl.
org/. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
96. International Pediatric Simulation Society. https://www.ipssglobal.org/. Accessed 8
Aug 2019.
97. American Society of Anesthesiologists. Simulation education network summit. https://www.
asahq.org/meetings/sen- summit. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
98. American College of Surgeons. Surgical simulation summit. https://www.facs.org/education/
accreditation/aei/surgical- simulation- summit. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
99. Center for Medical Simulation. Simulation instructor training. https://harvardmedsim.org/
training/simulation- instructor- training/. Accessed 8 Aug 2019.
100. Society for Simulation in Healthcare. Certication. https://www.ssih.org/Credentialing/
Certication. Accessed 9 Aug 2019.
J. L. Sparling and J. B. Cooper
Соседние файлы в папке @xirurgi_2025