Barriers to and Facilitators of Implementing Team-Based Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Simulation Study: Exploratory Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
intro: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a critical tool in the care of severe cardiorespiratory dysfunction. Simulation training for ECMO has become standard practice. Therefore, Keck Medicine of the University of California (USC) holds simulation-training sessions to reinforce and improve providers knowledge. Objective: This study aimed to understand the impact of simulation training approaches on interprofessional collaboration. We believed simulation-based ECMO training would improve interprofessional collaboration through increased communication and enhance teamwork. Methods: This was a single-center, mixed methods study of the Cardiac and Vascular Institute Intensive Care Unit at Keck Medicine of USC conducted from September 2021 to April 2023. Simulation training was offered for 1 hour monthly to the clinical team focused on the collaboration and decision-making needed to evaluate the initiation of ECMO therapy. Electronic surveys were distributed before, after, and 3 months post training. The survey evaluated teamwork and the effectiveness of training, and focus groups were held to understand social environment factors. Additionally, trainee and peer evaluation focus groups were held to understand socioenvironmental factors. Results: In total, 37 trainees attended the training simulation from August 2021 to August 2022. Using 27 records for exploratory factor analysis, the standardized Cronbach α was 0.717. The survey results descriptively demonstrated a positive shift in teamwork ability. Qualitative themes identified improved confidence and decision-making. Conclusions: The study design was flawed, indicating improvement opportunities for future research on simulation training in the clinical setting. The paper outlines what to avoid when designing and implementing studies that assess an educational intervention in a complex clinical setting. The hypothesis deserves further exploration and is supported by the results of this study.
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 | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".