↓ Skip to main content

Prompting with electronic checklist improves clinician performance in medical emergencies: a high-fidelity simulation study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Emergency Medicine, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prompting with electronic checklist improves clinician performance in medical emergencies: a high-fidelity simulation study
Published in
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12245-018-0185-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ronaldo Sevilla-Berrios, John C. O’Horo, Christopher N. Schmickl, Aysen Erdogan, Xiaomei Chen, Lisbeth Y. Garcia Arguello, Yue Dong, Oguz Kilickaya, Brain Pickering, Rahul Kashyap, Ognjen Gajic

Abstract

Inefficient processes of care delivery during acute resuscitation can compromise the "Golden Hour," the time when quick interventions can rapidly determine the course of the patient's outcome. Checklists have been shown to be an effective tool for standardizing care models. We developed a novel electronic tool, the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness (CERTAIN) to facilitate standardized evaluation and treatment approach for acutely decompensating patients. The checklist was enforced by the use of a "prompter," a team member separate from the leader who records and reviews pertinent CERTAIN algorithms and verbalizes these to the team. Our hypothesis was that the CERTAIN model, with the use of the tool and a prompter, can improve clinician performance and satisfaction in the evaluation of acute decompensating patients in a simulated environment. Volunteer clinicians with valid adult cardiac life support (ACLS) certification were invited to test the CERTAIN model in a high-fidelity simulation center. The first session was used to establish a baseline evaluation in a standard clinical resuscitation scenario. Each subject then underwent online training before returning to a simulation center for a live didactic lecture, software knowledge assessment, and practice scenarios. Each subject was then evaluated on a scenario with a similar content to the baseline. All subjects took a post-experience satisfaction survey. Video recordings of the pre-and post-test sessions were evaluated using a validated method by two blinded reviewers. Eighteen clinicians completed baseline and post-education sessions. CERTAIN prompting was associated with reduced omissions of critical tasks (46 to 32%, p < 0.01) and 12 out of 14 general assessment tasks were completed in a more timely manner. The post-test survey indicated that 72% subjects felt better prepared during an emergency scenario using the CERTAIN model and 85% would want to be treated with the CERTAIN if they were critically ill. Prompting with electronic checklist improves clinicians' performance and satisfaction when dealing with medical emergencies in high-fidelity simulation environment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 11 14%
Other 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 19 24%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 18%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Computer Science 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 21 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2019.
All research outputs
#9,370,304
of 16,292,621 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#270
of 463 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,870
of 281,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,292,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 463 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them