MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169247789 · doi:10.3810/hp.2011.08.587

Design and Implementation of a Low-Cost Multimodal Procedure Cart for an Internal Medicine Ward

2011· article· en· W2169247789 on OpenAlexaff
David Frost, Sherman Quan, Dalila Villalobos, Dante Morra, Rodrigo B. Cavalcanti

Bibliographic record

VenueHospital Practice · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCartMedical physicsIntensive care medicineMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: General internists perform a large number and variety of procedures in the ward and emergency department settings. Initiatives are needed to facilitate learning and increase efficiency of procedural skill acquisition by trainees. In this article, we describe our experience developing and implementing a low-cost multimodal procedure cart in an academic health sciences center. We also provide pilot data on perceived usefulness by trainees. METHODS: We performed a needs-assessment survey of residents, which indicated that the inconsistent location of materials and time needed to gather them were frustrating. Furthermore, residents reported that having easily accessible educational materials would improve their experience performing procedures. Based on this information, a portable cart was designed and implemented that had all materials required for common ward procedures, as well as multimodal educational materials, including evidence-based checklists, a hard-copy procedure manual, and a portable computer for viewing videos and logging procedures. The cart was equipped for the most commonly performed bedside procedures. After 2 months, we electronically surveyed residents on their experience with the intervention. Measures included self-reported frequency of use, satisfaction, perceived improvement in efficiency, and perceived improvement in patient safety. RESULTS: Residents perceived that the cart increased efficiency. The ready availability of educational materials was also noted as an advantage. Despite its perceived usefulness, trainees did not use the cart as frequently as anticipated. The cart continues to be in use > 1 year later, with modifications made based on feedback. CONCLUSIONS: In this article, we outline suggestions for successful implementation of a similar initiative based on our experience. We describe how a procedure cart can be inexpensively designed and instituted to facilitate more efficient performance of medical procedures and enhance education. Such an intervention may be beneficial in an academic as well as a community setting.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHospital PracticeSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207