Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:A variety of stressors are encountered while working in the emergency department and are often recreated in simulation-based medical education. We seek to examine the physiologic and stress state response of participants in a simulated clinical environment to commonly encountered stressors. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Emergency medicine (EM) residents participated in a randomized, controlled trial of six simulated patient encounters with one of three stressors, medical difficulty, interpersonal challenge, and technology/equipment failure, randomized into each scenario. Participants wore smart shirts to measure heart rate variability (HRV) at rest and just after the introduced stressor and completed the Short Stress State Questionnaire (SSSQ) before and after each scenario. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 0.8452). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Interpersonal challenge stressor was significantly associated with an increase in distress in EM residents during the simulated encounters as compared to the other stressors. While heart rate variability decreased from rest for each stressor as expected following stressor introduction, differing stressors did not produce a differential change.

OBJECTIVES:Agitation, defined as excessive psychomotor activity leading to aggressive or violent behaviour, is prevalent in the emergency department (ED) due to rising behavioural-related visits. Experts recommend use of verbal de-escalation and avoidance of physical restraint to manage agitation. However, bedside applications of these recommendations may be limited by system challenges in emergency care. This qualitative study aims to use a systems-based approach, which considers the larger context and system of healthcare delivery, to identify sociotechnical, structural, and process-related factors leading to agitation events and physical restraint use in the ED. DESIGN:Qualitative study using a grounded theory approach to triangulate interviews of patients who have been physically restrained with direct observations of agitation events. SETTING:Two EDs in the Northeast USA, one at a tertiary care academic centre and the other at a community-based teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS:We recruited 25 individuals who experienced physical restraint during an ED visit. In addition, we performed 95 observations of clinical encounters of agitation events on unique patients. Patients represented both behavioural (psychiatric, alcohol/drug use) and non-behavioural (medical, trauma) chief complaints. RESULTS:Three primary themes with implications for systems-based practice of agitation events in the ED emerged: (1) pathways within health and social systems; (2) interpersonal contexts as reflections of systemic stressors on behavioural emergency care and (3) systems-based and patient-oriented strategies and solutions. CONCLUSIONS:Agitation events represented manifestations of patients' structural barriers to care from socioeconomic inequities and high burden of emotional and physical trauma as well as staff members' simultaneous exposure to external stressors from social and healthcare systems. Potential long-term solutions may include care approaches that recognise agitated patients' exposure to psychological trauma, improved coordination within the mental health emergency care network, and optimisation of physical environment conditions and organisational culture.

INTRODUCTION:COVID-19 required healthcare systems to iteratively adapt for safe and up-to-date care as knowledge of the disease rapidly evolved. Rates of COVID-19 infections continue to fluctuate and patients without COVID-19 increasingly return to the emergency department (ED) for care. This leads to new challenges and threats to patient and clinician safety as suspected patients with COVID-19 need to be quickly detected and isolated among other patients with non-COVID-19-related illnesses. At the front lines, emergency physicians also face continued personal safety concerns and increased work burden, which heighten stress and anxiety, especially given the prolonged course of the pandemic. Burnout, already a serious concern for emergency physicians due to the cumulative stresses of their daily practice, may present as a longer-term outcome of these acute stressors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will implement a rapidly adaptive simulation-based approach to understand and improve physician preparedness while decreasing physician stress and anxiety. First, we will conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews and human factor observations to determine the challenges and facilitators of COVID-19 preparedness and mitigation of physician stress. Next, we will conduct a randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of a simulation preparedness intervention on physician physiological stress as measured by decreased heart rate variability on shift and anxiety as measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The protocol was reviewed and approved by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for funding, and ethics approval was obtained from the Yale University Human Investigation Committee in 2020 (HIC# 2000029370 and 2000029372). To support ongoing efforts to address clinician stress and preparedness, we will strategically disseminate the simulation intervention to areas most impacted by COVID-19. Using a virtual telesimulation and webinar format, the dissemination efforts will provide hands-on learning for ED and hospital administrators as well as simulation educators. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT04614844.

OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:We identified and quantified the gap between emergency medicine (EM) procedures currently taught using simulation versus those that educators would teach if they had better procedural task trainers. Additionally, we endeavored to describe which procedures were taught using homemade models and the barriers to creation and use of additional homemade models. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Using a modified Delphi process, we developed a survey and distributed it to a convenience sample of EM simulationists via the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Simulation Academy listserv. Survey items asked participants to identify procedures they thought should be taught using simulation ("most important"), do teach using simulation ("most frequent"), would teach if a simulator or model were available ("most needed"), and do teach using simulation with "homemade" models ("most frequent homemade"). RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Thirty-seven surveys were completed. The majority of respondents worked at academic medical centers and were involved in simulation-based education for at least 6 years. Three procedures ranked highly in overall teaching importance and currently taught categories. We identified four procedures that ranked highly as both important techniques to teach and would teach via simulation. Two procedures were selected as the most important procedures that the participants do teach via simulation but would like to teach in an improved way. We found 14 procedures that simulationists would teach if an adequate model was available, four of which are of high importance. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This study captured data to illuminate the procedural model gap and inform future interventions that may address it and meet the overarching objective to create better and more readily available procedure models for EM simulation educators in the future. It offers an informed way of prioritizing procedures for which additional homemade models should be created and disseminated as well as barriers to be aware of and to work to overcome. Our work has implications for learners, educators, administrators, and industry.

BACKGROUND:Health system science (HSS) encompasses both core and cross-cutting domains that emphasize the complex interplay of care delivery, finances, teamwork, and clinical practice that impact care quality and safety in health care. Although HSS skills are required during residency training for physicians, current HSS didactics have less emphasis on hands-on practice and experiential learning. Medical simulation can allow for experiential participation and reflection in a controlled environment. Our goal was to develop and pilot three simulation scenarios as part of an educational module for resident physicians that incorporated core and cross-cutting HSS domains.  METHODS: Each scenario included a brief didactic, an interactive simulation in small-group breakout rooms, and a structured debriefing. The case scenario topics consisted of educational leadership, quality and safety, and implementation science. Learners from four residency programs (psychiatry, emergency medicine, orthopedics, ophthalmology) participated January - March 2021. RESULTS:A total of 95 resident physicians received our curricular module, and nearly all (95%) participants who completed a post-session survey reported perceived learning gains. Emotional reactions to the session were positive especially regarding the interactive role-play format. Recommendations for improvement included participation from non-physician professions and tailoring of scenarios for specific disciplines/role. Knowledge transfer included use of multiple stakeholder perspectives and effective negotiation by considering power/social structures. CONCLUSIONS:The simulation-based scenarios can be feasibly applied for learner groups across different residency training programs. Simulations were conducted in a virtual learning environment, but future work can include in-person and actor-based simulations to further enhance emotional reactions and the reality of the case scenarios.

INTRODUCTION:The application of structural competency and structural vulnerability to emergency medicine (EM) research has not been previously described despite EM researchers routinely engaging structurally vulnerable populations. The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review and consensus-building process to develop a structurally competent research approach and operational framework relevant to EM research. METHODS:We conducted a scoping review focused on structural competency and structural vulnerability. Results of the review informed the development of a structural competency research framework that was presented throughout a multi-step consensus process culminating in the 2021 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference. Feedback to the framework was incorporated throughout the conference. RESULTS:The scoping review produced 291 articles with 123 articles relevant to EM research. All 123 articles underwent full-text review and data extraction following a standardized data extraction form. Most of the articles acknowledged or described structures that lead to inequities with a variety of methodological approaches used to operationalize structural competency and/or structural vulnerability. The framework developed aligned with components of the research process, drawing upon methodologies from studies included in the scoping review. CONCLUSION:The framework developed provides a starting point for EM researchers seeking to understand, acknowledge, and incorporate structural competency into EM research. By incorporating components of the framework, researchers may enhance their ability to address social, historical, political, and economic forces that lead to health inequities, reframing drivers of inequities away from individual factors and focusing on structural factors.

SUMMARY STATEMENT/CONCLUSIONS:As the field of healthcare simulation matures, formal accreditation for simulation fellowships and training programs has become increasingly available and touted as a solution to standardize the education of those specializing in healthcare simulation. Some simulation experts hold opposing views regarding the potential value of simulation fellowship program accreditation. We report on the proceedings of a spirited debate at the 20th International Meeting on Simulation in Healthcare in January 2020. Pro arguments view accreditation as the logical evolution of a maturing profession: improving training quality through standard setting, providing external validation for individual programs, and enhancing the program's return on investment. Con arguments view accreditation as an incompletely formulated construct; burdensome to the "financially strapped" fellowship director, misaligned with simulation fellows' needs and expectations, and confusing to administrators mistakenly equating accreditation with credentialing. In addition, opponents of accreditation postulate that incorporating curricular standards, practice guidelines, and strategies derived and implemented without rigor, supporting evidence and universal consensus is premature. This narrative review of our debate compares and contrasts contemporary perspectives on simulation fellowship program accreditation, concluding with formal recommendations for learners, administrators, sponsors, and accrediting bodies.

BACKGROUND:The presentation of critically ill patients to emergency departments often necessitates interhospital transfer (IHT) to a tertiary care center for specialized neurocritical care. Patients with nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage represent a critically ill population subject to high rates of IHT and who is thus an important target for research and quality improvement of IHT. We describe the use of an innovative simulation methodology engaging transfer staff, clinicians, and stakeholders to refine and facilitate the adoption of a standardized IHT protocol for transferring patients with neurovascular emergencies. METHODS:This was a qualitative study using a phenomenological approach. Participants consisted of IHT call center staff members, neurointensivists, neurosurgeons, and emergency physicians. We conducted a standardized telephone-based simulation case to prime participants for feedback on their experiences with IHT for intracranial hemorrhage patients. Facilitators conducted focus groups immediately after the simulation to identify process improvement opportunities. A structured thematic analysis identified overarching concepts from the data. RESULTS:We achieved data saturation with 7 simulations and a total of 24 participants. Thematic analysis identified 3 IHT-specific themes: (1) challenges unique to multispecialty critical illness, (2) interdisciplinary relationships and dynamics, and (3) communication and information processing for IHT. Three quality improvement initiatives emerged from the debriefings: standardized communication checklist, early acceptance protocol, and structure for telephone-based care handoffs. CONCLUSIONS:We demonstrate the use of telephone-based simulation technology to identify potential pitfalls and accelerate the adoption of a new IHT protocol for patients with nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage. New quality improvement strategies can organically result through interprofessional debriefings for patients with potentially complex handoffs between hospitals.