↓ Skip to main content

The effect of in situ simulation training on the performance of tasks related to patient safety during sedation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Anesthesia, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
The effect of in situ simulation training on the performance of tasks related to patient safety during sedation
Published in
Journal of Anesthesia, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00540-018-2460-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meital Ben-Ari, Gilad Chayen, Ivan P. Steiner, Dana Aronson Schinasi, Oren Feldman, Itai Shavit

Abstract

In many countries, procedural sedation outside of the operating room is performed by pediatricians. We examined if in situ sedation simulation training (SST) of pediatricians improves the performance of tasks related to patient safety during sedation in the Emergency Department (ED). We performed a single-center, quasi-experimental, study evaluating the performance of sedation, before-and-after SST. Sixteen pediatricians were evaluated during sedation as part of their usual practice, using the previously validated Sedation-Performance-Score (SPS). This tool evaluates physician behaviors during sedation that are conducive to safe patient outcomes. Following the sedation, providers completed SST, followed by a structured debriefing. They were then re-evaluated with the SPS during a subsequent patient sedation in the ED. Using multivariate regression, odds ratios were calculated for each SPS component, and were compared before and after the SST. Thirty-two sedations were performed, 16 before and 16 after SST. SPS scores improved from a median of 4 (IQR 2-5) to 6 (IQR 4-7) following SST (p < 0.0009, median difference 2, 95% CI 1-3). SST was associated with improved performance in four SPS components. The findings of this pilot study suggest that sedation simulation training of pediatricians improves several tasks related to patient safety during sedation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Other 6 12%
Researcher 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 18 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Unspecified 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 17 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,296,926
of 24,256,961 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anesthesia
#398
of 887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,994
of 448,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anesthesia
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,256,961 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 887 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 448,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.