Dataset Information

Formative Assessments Promote Procedural Learning and Engagement for Senior Pediatric Residents on Rotation in the Pediatric Emergency Department.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Procedural training is a universal concern amongst pediatric residents and their teachers. We developed and implemented formative assessments to generate direct and indirect procedural feedback. We analyzed changes in residents' perceived procedural knowledge, skills, confidence, and entrustment.

Methods

Senior pediatric residents rotating in the pediatric emergency department participated in video-recorded formative assessments of informed consent OSCEs and simulated toddler forehead laceration repair and infant lumbar puncture. Residents reflected on their perceived procedural knowledge, skills, confidence, and entrustment through Likert and entrustment scales. Secondary outcomes of formative assessment completion rates and proportions of procedures performed by pediatric residents tracked feasibility and potential clinical impact, respectively.

Results

Including the pilot period, 89% of residents (31 out of 35) received direct and indirect procedural feedback. Perceived composite competency and entrustment improved for laceration repair (competency: from 3.1 to 3.9, p < .001; entrustment: from 4.0 to 5.1, p < .001) and lumbar puncture (competency: from 3.5 to 4.0, p < .001; entrustment: from 4.6 to 5.6, p = .001). We observed an increase in the proportion of clinical laceration repairs (11% [97 out of 885] vs. 23% [218 out of 946], p < .001) and lumbar punctures (23% [12 out of 54] vs. 41% [21 out of 52], p = .05) performed by pediatric residents.

Discussion

Integrating feasible procedural formative assessments into the pediatric emergency department rotation had a positive impact on senior pediatric residents' perceptions of their procedural knowledge, skills, confidence, and entrustment and was associated with increased procedural engagement.

SUBMITTER: Goldman MP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9273678 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Procedural sedation and analgesia outside the operating theater have become standard care in managing pain and anxiety in children undergoing diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The objectives of this study are to describe the current pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia practice patterns in European emergency departments, to perform a needs assessment-like analysis, and to identify barriers to implementation. A survey study of European emergency departments treating children was conducted. Through a lead research coordinator identified through the Research in European Pediatric Emergency Medicine (REPEM) network for each of the participating countries, a 30-question questionnaire was sent, targeting senior physicians at each site. Descriptive statistics were performed. One hundred and seventy-one sites participated, treating approximately 5 million children/year and representing 19 countries, with a response rate of 89%. Of the procedural sedation and analgesia medications, midazolam (100%) and ketamine (91%) were available to most children, whereas propofol (67%), nitrous oxide (56%), intranasal fentanyl (47%), and chloral hydrate (42%) were less frequent. Children were sedated by general pediatricians in 82% of cases. Safety and monitoring guidelines were common (74%), but pre-procedural checklists (51%) and capnography (46%) less available. In 37% of the sites, the entire staff performing procedural sedation and analgesia were certified in pediatric advanced life support. Pediatric emergency medicine was a board-certified specialty in 3/19 countries. Physician (73%) and nursing (72%) shortages and lack of physical space (69%) were commonly reported as barriers to procedural sedation and analgesia. Nurse-directed triage protocols were in place in 52% of the sites, mostly for paracetamol (99%) and ibuprofen (91%). Tissue adhesive for laceration repair was available to 91% of children, while topical anesthetics for intravenous catheterization was available to 55%. Access to child life specialists (13%) and hypnosis (12%) was rare.Conclusion: Procedural sedation and analgesia are prevalent in European emergency departments, but some sedation agents and topical anesthetics are not widely available. Guidelines are common but further safety nets, nurse-directed triage analgesia, and nonpharmacologic support to procedural sedation and analgesia are lacking. Barriers to implementation include availability of sedation agents, staff shortage, and lack of space. What is Known: • Effective and prompt analgesia, anxiolysis, and sedation (PSA) outside the operating theatre have become standard in managing pain and anxiety in children undergoing painful or anxiogenic diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. • We searched PubMed up to September 15, 2020, without any date limits or language restrictions, using different combinations of the MeSH terms "pediatrics," "hypnotics and sedatives," "conscious sedation," and "ambulatory surgical procedures" and the non-MeSH term "procedural sedation" and found no reports describing the current practice of pediatric PSA in Europe. What is New: • This study is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to shed light on the pediatric PSA practice in European EDs and uncovers important gaps in several domains, notably availability of sedation medications and topical anesthetics, safety aspects such as PSA provider training, availability of nonpharmacologic support to PSA, and high impact interventions such as nurse-directed triage analgesia. • Other identified barriers to PSA implementation include staff shortage, control of sedation medications by specialists outside the emergency department, and lack of space.

Project description:ObjectivesMost children seeking emergency care are evaluated in general emergency departments (EDs). The cumulative pediatric clinical experiences of emergency medicine (EM) residents are largely unknown. This study examined EM resident pediatric clinical experience through the lens of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements and the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine.MethodsRetrospective, observational study of the cumulative clinical experience of two classes of EM residents from a 4-year training program at two pediatric EDs of a quaternary care pediatric center. A database of resident patient encounters was generated from the electronic medical record. Experiences classified included: diagnosis categories per the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine, procedures, and resuscitations. Results were stratified by age, acuity, and disposition.ResultsTwenty-five EM residents evaluated 17,642 patients (median = 723). Most patients (73.5%) were emergent acuity (Emergency Severity Index triage level 2 or 3 or non-intensive care admission); 2% were critical. Residents participated in 598 (median = 22) medical resuscitations and 483 (median = 19) trauma resuscitations. Minor procedures (e.g., laceration repair) were commonly performed; critical procedures (e.g., intubation) were rare. Exposure to neonates was infrequent and pediatric deaths were rare. Abdominal pain (5.7%), asthma exacerbation (4.6%), and fever (3.8%) were the most common diagnoses.ConclusionsEmergency medicine residents encountered a wide array of pediatric diagnoses throughout training and performed a substantial number of common pediatric procedures. Exposure to critical acuity and procedures, neonatal pathology, and certain pediatric-specific diagnoses, such as congenital heart disease, was limited despite training in a large, quaternary care children's hospital. Curriculum development and collaboration should focus on these areas.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Outcomes associated with a sedative regimen comprised ketamine + propofol for pediatric procedural sedation outside of both the pediatric emergency department and operating room are underreported. We used the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium database to describe a multicenter experience with ketamine + propofol by pediatric sedation providers. DESIGN:Prospective observational study of children receiving IV ketamine + propofol for procedural sedation outside of the operating room and emergency department using data abstracted from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium during 2007-2015. SETTING:Procedural sedation services from academic, community, free-standing children's hospitals, and pediatric wards within general hospitals. PATIENTS:Children from birth to less than or equal to 21 years old. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:A total of 7,313 pediatric procedural sedations were performed using IV ketamine + propofol as the primary sedative regimen. Median age was 84 months (range, < 1 mo to ? 21 yr; interquartile range, 36-144); 80.6% were American Society of Anesthesiologists-Physical Status less than III. The majority of sedation was performed in dedicated sedation or radiology units (76.1%). Procedures were successfully completed in 99.8% of patients. Anticholinergics (glycopyrrolate and atropine) or benzodiazepines (midazolam and lorazepam) were used in 14.2% and 41.3%, respectively. The overall adverse event and serious adverse event rates were 9.79% (95% CI, 9.12-10.49%) and 3.47% (95% CI, 3.07-3.92%), respectively. No deaths occurred. Risk factors associated with an increase in odds of adverse event included ASA status greater than or equal to III, dental suite, cardiac catheterization laboratory or radiology/sedation suite location, a primary diagnosis of having a gastrointestinal illness, and the coadministration of an anticholinergic. CONCLUSIONS:Using Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium data, we describe the diverse use of IV ketamine + propofol for procedural sedation in the largest reported cohort of children to date. Data from this study may be used to design sufficiently powered prospective randomized, double-blind studies comparing outcomes of sedation between commonly administered sedative and analgesic medication regimens.