MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155887431 · doi:10.1097/eja.0000000000001510

Effects of prior exposure to a visual airway cognitive aid on decision-making in a simulated airway emergency

2021· article· en· W3155887431 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fabricio B. Zasso, Vsevolod Perelman, Xiang Y. Ye, Martina Melvin, Evan Wild, Walter Tavares, Kong Eric You-Ten

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsThe Wilson CentreSinai Health SystemUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAirwayAirway managementTeamworkChecklistCognitionLaryngeal mask airwayIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyMedical emergencyAnesthesiaNursingPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decision-making deficits in airway emergencies have led to adverse patient outcomes. A cognitive aid would assist clinicians through critical decision-making steps, preventing key action omission. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the effects of a visual airway cognitive aid on decision-making in a simulated airway emergency scenario. DESIGN: Randomised controlled study. SETTING: Single-institution, tertiary-level hospital in Toronto, Canada from September 2017 to March 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Teams consisting of a participant anaesthesia resident, nurse and respiratory therapist were randomised to intervention (N = 20 teams) and control groups (N = 20 teams). INTERVENTION: Participants in both groups received a 15-min didactic session on crisis resource management which included teamwork communication and the concepts of cognitive aids for the management of nonairway and airway critical events. Only participants in the intervention group were familiarised, oriented and instructed on a visual airway cognitive aid that was developed for this study. Within 1 to 4 weeks after the teaching session, teams were video-recorded managing a simulated 'cannot intubate-cannot oxygenate' scenario with the aid displayed in the simulation centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Decision-making time to perform a front-of-neck access (FONA), airway checklist actions, teamwork performances and a postscenario questionnaire. RESULTS: Both groups performed similar key airway actions; however, the intervention group took a shorter decision-making time than the control group to perform a FONA after a last action [mean ± SD, 80.9 ± 54.5 vs. 122.2 ± 55.7 s; difference (95% CI) -41.2 (-76.5 to -6.0) s, P = 0.023]. Furthermore, the intervention group used the aid more than the control group (63.0 vs. 28.1%, P < 0.001). Total time of scenario completion, action checklist and teamwork performances scores were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prior exposure and teaching of a visual airway cognitive aid improved decision-making time to perform a FONA during a simulated airway emergency.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207