EFFECT OF EQUIPMENT ORGANIZATION ON NEONATAL RESUSCITATION UNDER SIMULATION CONDITIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) standardizes the steps needed during resuscitation of newborns. However, there are no recommendations on how to organize equipment to minimize errors or improve ergonomics. Adult and pediatric studies used large, comprehensive “code carts” and reported increases in speed of retrieval. However, this has not been studied with equipment sets used in the delivery room. OBJECTIVES: To compare performance in retrieving and using basic neonatal resuscitation equipment from an ergonomic equipment box versus a standard equipment bag in simulated scenarios. DESIGN/METHODS: NRP trained healthcare professionals (HCP) were recruited from a tertiary Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Using a crossover design, participants were randomized to two simulated neonatal resuscitation scenarios (use of standard equipment bag followed by ergonomic equipment box and visa versa). The scenarios were video recorded to analyze the time needed to i) perform four equipment related tasks and ii) to complete the entire scenario. In a pilot trial a mean of 180s was needed to complete a scenario. Thirty participants were required to detect a 10% difference with a power of 0.8 and a significance of 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using a paired t-test. A post-simulation survey examined user preference. RESULTS: We randomized 30 HCPs and observed four protocol violations (missing equipment), leaving 26 for analysis. Combined, HCPs had a mean scenario time of 192.6 ± 20.2s with the equipment bag and 176.1 ± 21.6s with the box, a difference of 16.5s (p<0.0001). HCPs (n=12) randomized to equipment bag followed by equipment box had a mean scenario time of 193.2 ± 16.1s and 163.7 ± 14.1s, respectively. Using the box, participants were faster by 29.5s (p<0.0001). In comparison, HCPs (n=14) randomized to equipment box then equipment bag had similar mean times of 186.7 ± 21.6s and 192.1 ± 23.7s, respectively. This likely represents a balance between the superiority of the box and the rehearsal effect of the second scenario. The post-simulation survey revealed preference by all participants for the equipment box. CONCLUSION: During neonatal resuscitation simulation, HCPs were able to retrieve equipment more quickly when it was ergonomically organized. Despite a lack of familiarity, all participants preferred the equipment box. Neonatal resuscitation equipment should be organized ergonomically to improve performance.(Fig 9, 10)
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".