Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Format for Breakout Working-groups Session  1 and 2:  PI and INSPIREco-facilitator will develop a set of objectives for “deliverable s” by theend of the session.  They will determine how to divide up the 2.5 hour timeslot for the working group to best fit needs.
  • IOM emergency care for children growing pains characterizes care as unevenInfants 88.5 visits per 100117 million ED visits/year in the US3.8 million infant visits/year
  • Aim is to present our embryonic network & if members agree then join INSPIRE as opposed to re-inventing the wheel
  • vision for the network to answer local issues through well formulated research questions and hypothesis. With an aim to draw from the experience of members of INSPIRE group to refine these. If INSPIRE felt the questions were of sufficiently high standard, we would be happy to incorporate international collaborators into the study. Or something like that which speaks to the fact that some studies will be done at a national level with intellectual support from INSPIRE group, whilst others would be proposed as larger study within the INSPIRE membership network.
  • Emphasis on ability to collaborate on an institutional and network level.
  • Breakout2

    1. 1. EpiPen: How its use in Pediatric HospitalAnaphylaxis May Impact Efficiency and Patient Safety Melinda Hamilton,Michael Rosen, Nnenna Chime, Elizabeth Hunt
    2. 2. Background• Anaphylaxis fatalities1 – Fatal food reactions, arrest within 30-35 min – Insect stings, collapse from shock 10-15 min – Deaths after IV medications occur within 5 min• Errors with epinephrine administration – Concentration of medication – Dose of Medication – Administration site• Epinephrine Autoinjectors – Concentration and dose guaranteed – More timely – Ease of use ?? 1Pumphrey et al, Clin Exp Allerg 2000
    3. 3. PICO Question• Population – Pediatric code teams managing a simulated pediatric anaphylaxis scenario• Intervention – Will the use of an epinephrine autoinjector device decrease medication errors and decrease time to medication administration during pediatric anaphylaxis• Comparison – compared with standard administration (med, syringe) of epinephrine from a code cart• Outcome – Decrease medication errors (dose, concentration, site) and decrease time to medication administration
    4. 4. Approach• Several levels 1. Survey to children’s hospitals to understand their anaphylaxis protocols 2. Simulation testing to define concerns (pilot) 1. Standard epi administration vs autoinjector 1. Evaluate time, dose, concentration 2. Note errors 3. Randomized controlled trial of simulated anaphylaxis scenarios 1. Measure time to administration 2. Dose, concentration 3. Errors
    5. 5. 3 Questions• What are children’s hospitals doing now?• Can we understand how big of an issue this is in pediatric hospitals?• What portions should be conducted at multiple centers ?
    6. 6. ALERT Presentation:Improving neonatal resuscitationusing a virtual interactive trainer Judy LeFlore, JoDee Anderson, Myra Wyckoff, Taylor Sawyer, Lindsay Johnston, Susan Niermeyer, Akira Nishisaki, Kathleen Ventre, Marge Zielke
    7. 7. Background• Airway management continues to be the leading challenge to neonatal patient survival and safety because endotracheal intubation skills are not easily taught.• Proficiency in safe and successful endotracheal tube placement improves with experience• Inability to recognize key landmarks for successful endotracheal intubation is the most significant failure point.• There is evidence that gaming and virtual reality in health care education increases knowledge acquisition and facilitates skill acquisition and transfer to clinical practice.
    8. 8. PICO Question• Population – Healthcare providers that have newborn resuscitation opportunities • NNPs • Pediatric residents • Respiratory therapists • Paramedics• Intervention – Neonatal Interactive Virtual Airway Trainer (NIVAT)• Comparison – Power point presentation• Outcome – Intubation success in the clinical setting will be greater for the NIVAT intervention group than for the PP intervention group
    9. 9. Approach• 3-Phase study (Design over 3 years) 1. Phase I: Development Phase 1. Develop NIVAT, Proficiency assessment, PPT 2. Rater reliability 3. Recruit/randomize 1. Benchmark proficiency (#1) 2. Orient to intervention, study protocol, introduce journals 4. Participants keep journals during remainder of Dev Phase 2. Phase 2: Intervention Phase 1. Collect journals (#1) 2. Proficiency assessment (#2) 3. Intervention 3. Phase 3: Degradation Phase 1. Collect journals (#2) 2. Proficiency assessment (#3) 3. Data analysis
    10. 10. Develop Phase (1 year) Intervention Phase Begins1. NIVAT 1. Collect journals (#1)2. PPT 2. Proficiency assessment (#2)3. Proficiency assessment tool 3. NIVAT or PPT Group Intervention4..Recruit5. Randomize6. Rater reliability Decay Phase7. Benchmark Proficiency (#1), 1. Collect journals (#2)8.Orient to intervention, study 2. Proficiency assessment (#3)protocol, and journal. 3. Data analysis9 Study participants keepjournals during DevelopmentPhase
    11. 11. 3 Questions• HOW DO WE: – To calculate adequately power for the study, what should be used to calculate effect size? – 30second from AAP – Success on first or second try 80% of time? – Where to recruit from now the GME no longer requires intubation as a competency. Will program directors think this study is important? How do we promote participants adherence to monthly NIVAT or PPT. Should we try different exposure times to assess “Dose effect”? Reliability of keeping accurate journals r/t intubation opportunities throughout the study? – Recruit research assistants committed to completing proficiency assessments when indicated
    12. 12. The impact of tele-presence on pediatric acute care in the emergency departmentMarc Auerbach, David Kessler, Adam Cheng,Betsy Hunt, Noelle Zuckerbraun, Bob Dudas, Lisa McQueen, John Lin, Vinay Nadkarni
    13. 13. Background• Pediatric Emergency Care is “uneven” – Pediatrics comprises 1/3 of ED visits – 80% GED, 20% PED• Telemedicine can improve access to specialists – Radiology, cardiology, child abuse, trauma, stroke – Tele-presence: real time participation in process • Reduced mortality in adult ICUs• Goal: optimal care whenever and wherever children present
    14. 14. PICO Question• Population – Simulated critically ill pediatric patient in a standard ED setting • Confederate/scripted RN, parents, ancillary staff • Standard patient evolution• Intervention – GED attending + Tele-present specialist (PED, PICU)• Comparison – GED attending only, PED attending only• Outcomes ? – Improve time to interventions, adherence to guidelines – Reduce errors
    15. 15. Project Aims1. To characterize the differences in the process of care for a simulated critically ill infant by pediatric and general emergency medicine physicians1. To evaluate the impact of real-time tele- presence of sub-specialty pediatric acute care providers on the process of care for a simulated critically ill infant
    16. 16. Approach• Prospective simulation-based study 1 2 3 GED PED GED Tele
    17. 17. 3 Questions1. What is the “ideal” case for this study?2. What is our outcome variables and statistical plans for this study? (primary and secondary) – Time to interventions – Adherence to PALS – No flow fraction – Errors3. How do we train confederates as team members to isolate provider cognitive processes?
    18. 18. Objectives for 2.5 hours• Create timeline for study• Determine primary outcome, secondary outcomes• Design case scenario(s)• Frame up an assessment instrument to pilot• Assign projects to collaborators
    19. 19. NIPPERS Presentation: National Inter ProfessionalPaediatric Education Research in Simulation network (UK) C. Bennett, K. Claydon-Smith, J. Cusack, D, DeBeer, T. Everett, J.Fawke, S. Gough, D. Grant, S.Hancock, S. Hanna, F. Horrox, A. Johnson, D. Kerr, R. MacKinnon, W. Marriage, S. Newell, K. Parkins, D. Rowney, A. Stevenson & P. Weir
    20. 20. Background• Collaborative simulation research scarcity in UK• ASPIH / IPSS – Inter-professional UK network – Vision: to answer local issues through well formulated research – Inaugural research group meeting 5th Feb 2012• Identifiable Patient Impact Knowledge Gaps – Trauma Team Outreach Educational Interventions – Paediatric Palliative Care Packages – In situ Paediatric Cardiac Arrest Team Performance – Inter-professional Undergraduate Education
    21. 21. PICO Question• Population – In UK pediatric inter-professional teams• Intervention – will the use of a multi-site targeted simulation educational interventions• Comparison – compared with no interventions• Outcome – improve direct clinical impact, team performance & translational learning
    22. 22. Approach• Mixed Methods Analysis 1. Development of standardised peer reviewed educational interventions 2. Pilot studies of educational interventions 3. Assessment pre-introduction 4. Focus groups & targeted cohorts for educational interventions 5. Quantitative & Qualitative assessment of impact on patient care, team performance & translational learning
    23. 23. 3 Questions• Is there scope for international collaboration?• What issues do we need to consider when standardizing the research across study sites?• How will the INSPIRE model function to address the needs of national networks and single institution members of part of INSPIRE network?