Impact of Production Pressure in the Block Room on Patient Safety

August 17, 2021 updated by: Marie-Eve Belanger, Ciusss de L'Est de l'Île de Montréal

Examining the Impact of Production Pressure in the Regional Anesthesia Block Room on Patient Safety, a Randomized Single Blind Study in a High Fidelity Simulation Environment

This randomized, single blinded simulation based study investigates the impact that production pressure can have on the safety of patients undergoing regional anesthesia. We created a high fidelity scenario where anesthesiologists and trainees were to perform a single shot infraclavicular ultrasound guided block. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Participants assigned to the intervention group were exposed to various production pressure generating interventions. The goal of this study was to look at the impact of production pressure on patient safety by scoring anesthesiologists' and trainees' performance and examining the differences between the two groups.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Sample size:

To our knowledge, no studies were performed to evaluate the impact of production pressure on anesthesiologists nor on how to emulate production pressure in a simulated environment. Although it is known that production pressure affects negatively healthcare workers' performance, it remains difficult to predict its impact on a scoring system such as the RAPS assessment tool. Therefore, we used a convenience sample based on the number of residents and staffs anesthesiologists who agreed to participate. Using the t value and the degrees-of-freedom of the unpaired t-test, the investigators calculated the effect size (r) to characterize the magnitude of the effect and evaluate if the sample size is enough to answer the research hypothesis. An r value of around 0.2 was considered a "weak" effect, 0.5 "medium", and 0.8 "strong". We intend to recruit between 10 to 20 participants in each group.

Scenario:

Participants were asked to obtain consent and perform a single shot infraclavicular ultrasound guided block on a 50 year old woman with mild COPD. The simulation took place in situ in a regional anesthesia block room. Upon entering the room, the anesthesiology evaluation was already completed. A CAE infraclavicular block simulator was installed on a simulated patient. A simulated anesthesiology nurse was also present to assist only. All preparation steps and safety measures had to be initiated by the participant. Participants in the intervention group were exposed to 4 standardized pre-recorded audio interventions, encouraging them to proceed faster. The choice of these interventions was based on articles and surveys detailing the common sources of production pressure for the anesthesiologist.

Data collection:

Performances were filmed in order to be reviewed by three regional anesthesia experts. Participants were then asked to fulfill a questionnaire in another room. This form included a validated task load index grid (NASA) to quantify the amount of stress experienced, demographic data and a realism score.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

39

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Quebec
      • Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H1T 2M4
        • Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • To be a certified anesthesiologist or anesthesiology resident
  • To have performed at least 10 regional anesthesia techniques including 5 infraclavicular blocks
  • To consent to the study

Exclusion Criteria:

- To refuse to participate

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Production pressured environment
Participants in this group were exposed to 4 audio recordings applying standardized pressure. Unlimited time.
Participant exposed to production pressure
No Intervention: Regular environment
The control group was asked to complete the same task also with unlimited time. They were not exposed to the audio recordings.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
RAPS score
Time Frame: Through scenario completion (approximatively 25 minutes)
Score obtained from regional anesthesia experts using the RAPS assessment tool, a validated tool to measure performance of a regional anesthesia technique (see reference)
Through scenario completion (approximatively 25 minutes)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Time to complete the task
Time Frame: Through scenario completion (approximatively 25 minutes)
Time between skin asepsis and needle withdrawal
Through scenario completion (approximatively 25 minutes)
Stress level experienced
Time Frame: Through scenario completion (approximatively 25 minutes)

As measured by the NASA task load index, a validated tool to measure mental and physical stress experience during a task.

The participant has to rate each 6 category on a continous scale of 21 points as shown below.

Mental Demand From very low to very high Physical Demand From very low to very high Temporal demand From very low to very high Performance From perfect to failure (This scale in interpreted in a reverse way) Effort From very low to very high Frustration From very low to very high The next step for the participant is to do a pairwise comparison of each category by selection the most contributive.

Results are presented with transformation of the 21 points to a 100 points scale as a rating from 0 to 100 ( Low to high task load) By using pairwise comparison, a weighted global result is also presented with a score from 0 to 100 (Low to high task load)

Through scenario completion (approximatively 25 minutes)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Collaborators

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

March 20, 2021

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 30, 2021

Study Completion (Actual)

May 30, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 13, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 13, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

April 15, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 20, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 17, 2021

Last Verified

August 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2021-2533

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Anesthesia

Clinical Trials on Production pressure

Search Similar Trials