6 research outputs found

    Change in Sleep Quality of Residents the Night Before High-Fidelity Simulation: Results From a Prospective 1-Year National Survey.

    Full text link
    peer reviewed[en] OBJECTIVE: The stress level of participants in high-fidelity simulation stems from various factors but may result in anticipatory anxiety causing sleep disturbances during the night prior to simulation. The objective of this survey was to determine the change in sleep quality of residents during the night prior to the simulation. METHODS: The survey was proposed for 1 year to all residents at the beginning of the simulation, in 10 simulation centres. The questionnaire combined demographics and the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire using visual analogue scales divided into 4 sleep qualitative domains. The primary outcome was the prevalence of sleep disturbance (>10 mm on 1 domain). Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of severe sleep disturbance (>25 mm), as well as qualitatively and quantitatively reported explanatory sleep parameters. RESULTS: Among respondents, 66% [95% CI: 63 to 69] of residents had more than 10 mm and 27% [95% CI: 24 to 30] had more than 25 mm of sleep disturbance. Residents with a sleep disturbance of more than 10 mm had fewer hours of sleep (6.4 [standard deviation=1.8] vs 7.3 [standard deviation=1.3], difference: -0.9 [95% CI: -1.1 to -0.7]; P < .0001), with a higher number of night-time awakenings (1.3 [standard deviation=1.5] vs 0.7 [standard deviation=0.9], difference: 0.6 [95% CI: 0.4 to 0.8]; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Among residents participating in the simulation, a high prevalence of change in sleep quality during the night before the simulation was noted. Strategies to help residents achieve better sleep prior to simulation should be explored

    Role of the internet as an information resource before anaesthesia consultation: A French prospective multicentre survey

    No full text
    International audienceBACKGROUND:Use of the internet as an information search tool has increased dramatically. Our study assessed preoperative use of the internet by patients to search for information regarding anaesthesia, surgery, pain or outcomes.OBJECTIVE(S):The aim of this study was to test whether patients used the internet prior to surgery and what kinds of information they looked for (anaesthetic technique, pain, adverse events, outcomes and surgery). Correlation between patient age and information sought about surgery from the internet was also explored.DESIGN:A prospective multicentre observational study.SETTING:In total, 14 French private and public institutions from May 2015 to January 2016.PATIENTS:In total, 3161 adult patients scheduled for elective surgery under regional or general anaesthesia.INTERVENTION(S):An anonymous questionnaire was presented to adult patients scheduled for elective surgery under regional or general anaesthesia for completion before the first meeting with the anaesthesiologist. The investigator at each centre completed specific items that the patient could not complete.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:We defined the primary endpoint as the number of patients who searched for information about their anaesthesia or surgery on the internet by the time of the their preanaesthetic consultation.RESULTS:Of the 3234 questionnaires distributed, responses were received from 3161 patients. Within this respondent sample, 1304 (45%) were professionally active and 1664 (59%) used the internet at least once per day. Among 3098 (98%) patients who answered the question concerning the primary endpoint, 1506 (48%) had searched the internet for information about their health. In total, 784 (25%) used the internet to find information about their surgery and 113 (3.5%) looked for specific information about anaesthesia. Of the 3161, 52% reported difficulty searching for appropriate information about anaesthesia on the internet. 'Daily use of the web' [odds ratio (OR) 2.0; (95% CI: 1.65 to 2.55) P < 0.001], 'use of the web on mobile devices' [OR 1.24; (95% CI: 1.02 to 1.50) P = 0.02] and 'asking general practitioner or surgeon about information' [OR 1.35; (95% CI: 1.11 to 1.64) P = 0.002] were significantly associated with the primary endpoint.CONCLUSION:The internet was not widely used by patients scheduled for elective surgery to search for information about anaesthesia and surgery in our French multicentre study

    Simulation-based summative assessment in healthcare: an overview of key principles for practice.

    Full text link
    peer reviewed[en] BACKGROUND: Healthcare curricula need summative assessments relevant to and representative of clinical situations to best select and train learners. Simulation provides multiple benefits with a growing literature base proving its utility for training in a formative context. Advancing to the next step, "the use of simulation for summative assessment" requires rigorous and evidence-based development because any summative assessment is high stakes for participants, trainers, and programs. The first step of this process is to identify the baseline from which we can start. METHODS: First, using a modified nominal group technique, a task force of 34 panelists defined topics to clarify the why, how, what, when, and who for using simulation-based summative assessment (SBSA). Second, each topic was explored by a group of panelists based on state-of-the-art literature reviews technique with a snowball method to identify further references. Our goal was to identify current knowledge and potential recommendations for future directions. Results were cross-checked among groups and reviewed by an independent expert committee. RESULTS: Seven topics were selected by the task force: "What can be assessed in simulation?", "Assessment tools for SBSA", "Consequences of undergoing the SBSA process", "Scenarios for SBSA", "Debriefing, video, and research for SBSA", "Trainers for SBSA", and "Implementation of SBSA in healthcare". Together, these seven explorations provide an overview of what is known and can be done with relative certainty, and what is unknown and probably needs further investigation. Based on this work, we highlighted the trustworthiness of different summative assessment-related conclusions, the remaining important problems and questions, and their consequences for participants and institutions of how SBSA is conducted. CONCLUSION: Our results identified among the seven topics one area with robust evidence in the literature ("What can be assessed in simulation?"), three areas with evidence that require guidance by expert opinion ("Assessment tools for SBSA", "Scenarios for SBSA", "Implementation of SBSA in healthcare"), and three areas with weak or emerging evidence ("Consequences of undergoing the SBSA process", "Debriefing for SBSA", "Trainers for SBSA"). Using SBSA holds much promise, with increasing demand for this application. Due to the important stakes involved, it must be rigorously conducted and supervised. Guidelines for good practice should be formalized to help with conduct and implementation. We believe this baseline can direct future investigation and the development of guidelines
    corecore