Abstract
We report on data and debriefing observations in the context of an immersive simulation conducted to (a) train clinicians and (b) test new protocols and kits, developed in table-top exercises without prior clinical experience to fit anticipated clinical encounters in the setting of the rapidly expanding COVID-19 pandemic. We simulated scenarios with particular relevance for anesthesiology, perioperative and critical care, including (1) cardiac arrest, (2) emergency airway management, (3) tele-instruction for remote guidance and supervision, and (4) transporting an intubated patient.
Using a grounded theory approach, three authors (MHA, DLR, EHS) developed emergent themes. First alone and then together, we sought consensus in uncovering overarching themes and constructs from the debriefings. We thus performed an informal qualitative thematic analysis based in a critical realist epistemological position - the understanding that our findings, while real, are affected by situational variables and the observer's perspective[1,2]. We compared data from videos and triangulated the data by member checking. All participants and course instructors volunteered to participate in this educational project and contributed as co-authors to this manuscript.
During debriefing, we applied crisis resource management concepts including situation awareness, prioritization of tasks, and clear communication practices, conducting the debriefing with emphasis on current TeamStepps 2.0 terminology and concepts. [3,4] In addition, we re-evaluated formerly familiar processes, as shortcomings of protocols, kits, and interdisciplinary cooperation became apparent. The data provide detailed observations on how immersive simulation and debriefing among peers mitigated the unfamiliarity of individual clinicians and the organization at large with the demands of an unprecedented healthcare crisis. We also observed and report on the anxiety caused by resource constraints, risk to clinicians in the face of limited personal equipment, and the overall uncertainty surrounding COVID-19.
We began to summarize, interpret, critique, and discuss our data and debriefing observations in a rapid co-publication in the Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. [Healthcare Simulation to Prepare for the COVID-19 Pandemic][5]
Keyword: Simulation, Adult critical care, Perioperative care, Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Personal protective equipment, Crisis Resource Management, System Integration, Anesthesiology
Specifications table
Subject | Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine |
Specific subject area | Immersive healthcare simulation in perioperative medicine for process improvement and pandemic preparedness |
Type of data | Tables |
How data were acquired | We converted a previously scheduled MOCA (Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology) simulation course [6,7] in our American Society of Anesthesiologists Endorsed simulation program to train internal clinicians in scenarios related to COVID-19 [8,9] and to vet Covid-19 protocols developed in round table discussion by experts, who however had no prior exposure to patients suspected or affected by COVID-19 in the evolving pandemic. Using a grounded theory approach, three authors (MHA, DLR, EHS) developed emergent themes in an informal qualitative thematic analysis[1,2]. |
Data format | Analyzed |
Parameters for data collection | Case Scenarios Simulated Anticipated COVID-19 Clinical Encounters |
Description of data collection | Immersive healthcare simulation with seven clinical experts was conducted on four anticipated airborne contagious disease scenarios and the authors analyzed the ensuing debriefing and the case videos. |
Data source location | Institution: Medical Simulation Center, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center City/Town/Region: Hershey, Pennsylvania Country: USA |
Data accessibility | With the article |
Related research article | Co-Publication[5]: Andreae MH, Dudak A, Cherian V, et al. Healthcare simulation to prepare for the COVID-19 pandemic [published online ahead of print, 2020 May 27]. J Clin Anesth. 2020;66:109,928. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109928 |
1. Value of the data
-
•
Immersive healthcare simulation employing anticipated clinical encounters may be useful to test COVID-19 [8,10,11] and other airborne contagious disease hospital protocols, developed with limited clinical experience, to detect shortcoming before such gaps become apparent in clinical care and threaten patient or provider safety[12], [13], [14].
-
•
Our report is geared towards other simulation professionals[6,15,16], especially in anesthesiology[17], critical care, and perioperative medicine, who want to leverage immersive simulation to vet their airborne precaution care protocols before the arrival of an epidemic. [12], [13], [14]
-
•
The purpose of our detailed simulation protocols (Table 2) is allow replication of typical airborne contagious disease simulation scenarios and the summary of the emergent themes and key learning points allow others to anticipate, contrast, and triangulate simulation debriefings with participants.
-
•
Given the limited recent experience of healthcare providers in industrialized countries with airborne contagious disease, simulation fill a void not only to train providers in anticipated scenarios, but to test protocols developed in table top exercises without prior clinical exposure, and to augment the organizational response, by improving interdisciplinary coordination[13,14,18].
Table 2.
Case | Title | Scenario | Central Theme |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Conflict resolution in triage situations during a global pandemic | A 65 year old female is denied admission despite significant respiratory distress, because the hospital is stretched beyond capacity and has no more beds. The participants have to break the news to the patient and her family. Patient and relatives a visibly upset and then the son brandishes a gun. | The central theme is a candid discussion of triage in a pandemic and the resulting anguish, conflicts and distress, affecting all stakeholders, including the patient, his or her family, the gatekeeper/decision maker, the messenger, who is informing the patient of the decision, the provider in the background and security personnel enforcing the triage decisions. |
2 | Ventilating more than one patient with one ventilator during COVID-19 | The participants are informed that we have fewer ventilators than patients needing support. The group is asked to setup a ventilator to ventilate four manikins. Given the shortage of ventilators, this could increase the number of patients we can save. | The central themes are (1) the technical execution assembling the parts to connect four patients to one ventilator, (2) the trouble-shooting different and changing lung compliance and the resulting complications of this setup, and (3) the perspective of the participants on this desperate intervention. |
3 | Family discussion about terminal extubation in an elderly COVID-19 patient with a poor prognosis | Participants are asked to discuss goals of care with the family of an elderly COVID-19 patient with a poor prognosis, in the face of an acute shortage of ventilators. |
The central theme is the distress of family and providers facing a grim ethical dilemma of resource allocation in the context of a pandemic. |
2. Data description
Table 1
Table 1.
Case | Title | Scenario | Central Theme/Key Lessons |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Cardiac Arrest for Patient with Possible Communicable Airborne Disease | The team is called to the emergency department to assist with a patient in respiratory distress. During evaluation, patient experiences respiratory arrest and cardiovascular collapse. Goal – Participants will adapt Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) algorithms for a possible COVID-19 patient in cardiac arrest. Focus is on situation awareness during the first minutes of the event, with emphasis on teamwork to provide CPR, defibrillation, airway management, and the first epinephrine administration with modifications for a COVID-19 positive situation. |
The central theme is the concept of "Protected Code Blue" where team member safety is emphasized. Procedures are altered to protect the resuscitation team in the context of airborne transmission. Key lessons Huddle outside and establish clear communications to contain airborne contamination. Clinician protection is still a priority even in emergency events. Airborne disease may drive changes in the algorithm such as earlier advanced airway placement and stopping CPR for airway placement. Minimize equipment and clinicians entering the room to reduce contamination and exposure. Integrate procedures across professions or disciplines and ensure scope of practice fits new pandemic practice patterns. |
2 | Emergency Airway Management for Patient with Contagious Respiratory Disease | Participants are called to assist with the airway management of a known COVID-19 patient in acute respiratory distress to facilitate intubation. The scenario unfolds into an anaphylaxis with a difficult airway. Goal – Participants will modify their approach to securing an emergency airway due to respiratory failure in a positive COVID-19 patient with difficult airway due to anaphylaxis. Focus Is on planning and preparation to provide initial oxygenation and ventilation, management of anaphylaxis, and intubation after respiratory failure. |
The central theme is provider safety and containment of airborne transmission during airway management of a COVID-19 patient. Key lessons Airway instrumentation and mask ventilation expose clinicians to virus aerosolization. Dedicated airway kits can be optimized for COVID-19 patients. Airborne disease may lead to different airway tools and management options. Limited tools and increased risk may necessitate faster progression to emergency surgical airway. |
3 | Transport of a Patient with Contagious Airborne Disease | A known COVID-19 patient needs an in-hospital transport from the ICU to the OR. The patient is intubated on high PEEP and FiO2. He is on multiple infusions including pressors to maintain blood pressure, sedatives, and epoprostenol to improve V/Q mismatch. Participants must prepare the patient for transport and move the patient from the room and down the hall. Goal – Participants will prepare for and transport a COVID-19 positive patient from the Intensive Care Unit to the Operating Room for emergency surgery taking necessary actions to limit virus exposure during the transport while protecting the patient from acute deterioration. Focus is on establishing clear roles for multiprofessional team members and taking actions to reduce potential of virus spread during the transport. |
The central theme is on team coordination, communication with hospital entities and adherence to protocol to contain viral spread. Key Lessons Interdisciplinary discussion to evaluate the need for transfer versus performing the procedure in patient room. Limit infusion pumps and other equipment and cover all equipment to reduce contamination during transport. If not already intubated, consider intubation prior to transport to avoid bag mask ventilation and exposure of OR personnel and bystanders. Coordination between “clean” and “contaminated” personnel is paramount. |
4 | Tele-instruction for Remote Procedural Guidance and Supervision | The participants are tasked to place a chest-tube, but there is no provider available who has experience in placing a chest tube. A provider with experience in chest tube placement remotely directs the bedside clinician on performing the procedure using a Tele-ICU unit or other similar two way- audio/visual system. Goal – Remote team leader will provide instruction and coaching to team members using a two-way audio/visual link (telehealth) to instruct bedside participant how to perform chest tube placement in a patient with a tension pneumothorax that has been temporized with needle thoracotomy. Focus in on clear communication for skills coaching using appropriate telehealth communication practices and techniques to assist the bedside clinician in performing the procedure under remote direction. |
The central theme is communication and supervision via remote telecommunication to perform a life-saving procedure. Key lessons If time permits, a dry run or rehearsal improves communication and shared mental modeling for the procedure. Align camera or patient, moving the more mobile of the two, to create better remote viewing point. Remote coach maintains a composed demeanor to induce corresponding calm in the clinician at the bedside. Clear, specific instructions delivered in a calm voice while directing and coaching the bedside clinician enhance success. |
Abbreviations: ICU: intensive care unit, OR: operating room, PEEP: positive end expiratory pressure, FiO2: fraction of inspired oxygen, V/Q: ventilation/perfusion (lung function).
Table 1 tabulates the four simulation scenarios representing anticipated clinical encounters with COVID-19 patients, which we simulated at Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA in March 2020, prior to admitting any COVID-19 patient, with a view to training our providers and testing our COVID-19 protocols in realistic simulation scenarios prior to the arrival of COVID-19 cases at our institution. Case number and Title are in the first and second column on the left, respectively. The Scenario presented to the participant is sketched in the next column and the Central Themes and Key Lessons elicited during our debriefings in the column can be found in the column on the right.
Table 2
Table 2 presents additional emerging themes observed during the debriefing and simulation cases conceived, subsequent to our debriefing of the initial four scenarios simulated representing anticipated clinical encounters with COVID-19 patients. These additional scenarios are still awaiting simulation. Cases are numbered in the first column on the left. A succinct Title summarizes the case content. The Scenario presented to the participant is sketched in the next column and the central themes ate elicited in the column Central Theme on the utmost right.
Table 3
Table 3.
Case 1: Cardiac arrest for patient with possible communicable airborne disease Case 2: Emergency airway management for patient with contagious respiratory disease Case 3: Transport of a patient with contagious airborne disease Case 4: Tele-instruction for remote procedural guidance and supervision |
Case 1: Cardiac arrest for patient with possible communicable airborne diseaseGoal – Participants will adapt Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) algorithms for a possible COVID-19 patient in cardiac arrest.Objectives – Participants will…
|
|
Upon questioning, the nurse supplies the following…
|
The scenario may evoke feelings of anxiety and distress in the participants, which may come up in the discussion. Contingent on the familiarity of the participants with each other, it may be challenging to lead a discussion about concerns that touch on personal safety, professional ethics, and professional identity.Distress may be caused by:
|
Briefing –“Your team has been called to an inpatient room for a known COVID-19 positive patient in acute respiratory distress.”Simulation Progression –In scenario actor meets team in hallway outside patient room, stating…
|
|
Case 3: Transport of a Patient with Contagious Airborne DiseaseGoal – Participants will prepare for and transport a COVID-19 positive patient from the Intensive Care Unit to the Operating Room for emergency surgery taking necessary actions to limit virus exposure to team members and others during the transport.Objectives – Participants will…
|
|
Physical examination –
|
Case 4: Tele-instruction for Remote Procedural Guidance and SupervisionGoal – Remote team leader will provide instruction and coaching to team members using a two-way audio/visual link (telehealth) to instruct bedside participant how to perform chest tube placement in a patient with a tension pneumothorax that has been temporized with needle thoracotomy.This scenario requires the “Hot Seat” participant in the role of the remote team leader to be experienced in the procedure and the bedside clinician to be relatively inexperienced or not current in practice of the procedure. For this reason, participant roles were specially designated.Note – This section details the telehealth interaction between the remote team leader and the bedside clinician(s). This section was preceded by the bedside team assessing and intervening with a patient presenting with possible tension pneumothorax. The “Hot Seat” participant was the remote team leader. The first part of this scenario was conducted to provide another training opportunity for participants to cover key objectives presented in other simulation scenarios regarding team management in COVID-19 patients.Objectives (specific to telehealth interaction for chest tube placement) –
|
Vital Signs
|
Abbreviations: CICO: can't intubate, can't oxygenate, EKG: Electrocardiogram, NIBP: noninvasive blood pressure, EtCo2: end-tidal carbon dioxide SpO2: peripheral oxygen saturation, IV: intravenous, KVO: keep vein open.
Table 3 offers a detailed description of the enacted four clinical scenarios of anticipated COVID-19 encounters with objectives, equipment and supplies as well as resources needed, a description of the roles, and the sequential development of the scenario to allow for an easy replication of the reported healthcare simulation scenarios.
3. Experimental design, materials and methods
Simulation context, setup, and debriefing
When we conducted our simulations in March 2020, hospitals resources were already stretched in New York City. Penn State teams had started to develop protocols to guide clinicians in expected COVID-19 scenarios, based on the sparse medical literature available at that time. However, no one on our teams had gained any personal experience managing patients with COVID-19[8,9,11], as no COVID-19 patients had been yet admitted at our institution, the Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center (MSHMC), in Hershey, Central Pennsylvania. We converted a previously scheduled MOCA (Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology) simulation course [6,7,19] in our American Society of Anesthesiologists Endorsed simulation program to train internal clinicians in scenarios related to COVID-19. The simulations were hence geared towards experienced anesthesiology, perioperative and critical care physicians. Several authors (MHA, ES, DLR, VC and AD) designed four cases for seven participating physician anesthesiologists, who would each be in the “hot seat”, (the critical central active role of the scenario), at least once. [20] All participants and course instructors were employed by the Medical Center and contributed as co-authors to this manuscript.
Case scenarios simulated anticipated COVID-19 clinical encounters
The sequence of our simulations was as follows. All participants initially participated in three skills practice sessions expected to be relevant to patient care: 1) donning and doffing of PPE; 2) emergency surgical airway; and 3) intraosseous access[9,21]. This was followed by case scenarios beginning with a code blue/cardiac arrest in a patient with a history consistent with COVID-19 infection, but without confirmatory or exclusionary test results available. One participant was given the role of the team leader and the rest were expected to act as the response team[20]. This case was debriefed first on the teamwork and communication aspects of the code response along the lines of usual CRM (Crisis Resource Management) debriefing [22,23] and then the entire group discussed aspects of the case specifically relevant to changes in practice specific to managing a cardiac arrest patient in the context of possible COVID-19 infection[12]. The same case was repeated with a different team leader and the group practiced the protocol that had been designed for COVID-19 patients for management of cardiac arrest. The debriefing that followed focused primarily on how the protocol worked and what needed to be changed or refined in the protocol.
Next, two scenarios for known COVID-19 patients were run simultaneously for two different teams. One case required the team to transport an intubated patient to the operating room, and the other case was a difficult emergency airway where the patient cannot be intubated or oxygenated requiring an emergency surgical airway[9,24,25]. These cases were debriefed for CRM concepts[22,23] and then new protocols for patient transport and emergency airway management were discussed and suggestions made for revisions. The final case was a tension pneumothorax in a COVID-19 patient that is relieved by needle decompression. The participant in the room with only minimal experience in placing a chest tube is provided with a telemedicine link to an expert (the hotseat participant) who must guide them through the procedure remotely[26]. The CRM debriefing for this case was followed by a discussion of available telehealth resources at our institution, practical aspects of how to access those, and communication behaviors that facilitated effective remote telepresence guidance of the procedure.
Ethics statement
All participants and course instructors volunteered to participate in this educational project and contributed as co-authors to this manuscript.
Declaration of Competing Interest
No author has any competing interest.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the staff of the simulation center for their help to conduct this project during the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic
Footnotes
Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.dib.2020.106028.
Appendix. Supplementary materials
References
- 1.Charmaz K. sage; 2006. Constructing Grounded theory: A practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Hill C.E., Knox S., Thompson B.J., Williams E.N., Hess S.A., Ladany N. Consensual qualitative research: an update. J. Couns. Psychol. 2005;52:196. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Chen A.S., Yau B., Revere L., Swails J. Implementation, evaluation, and outcome of teamstepps in interprofessional education: a scoping review. J. Interprof. Care. 2019;33:795–804. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2019.1594729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality . TeamSTEPPS 2.0 curriculum materials. 2019. https://www.ahrq.gov/teamstepps/ (accessed June 30, 2020) [Google Scholar]
- 5.Andreae M.H., Dudak A., Cherian V., Dhar P., Dalal P.G., Po W., Pilipovic M., Shah B., Hazard W., Dl R., Eh S. Healthcare simulation to prepare for the covid-19 pandemic. J. Clin. Anesth. 2020;66 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109928. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Weinger M.B., Banerjee A., Burden A.R., McIvor W.R., Boulet J., Cooper J.B., Steadman R., Shotwell M.S., Slagle J.M., DeMaria S., Torsher L., Sinz E., Levine A.I., Rask J., Davis F., Park C., Gaba D.M. Simulation-based assessment of the management of critical events by board-certified anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology. 2017;127:475–489. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001739. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Steadman R.H., Burden A.R., Huang Y.M., Gaba D.M., Cooper J.B. Practice improvements based on participation in simulation for the maintenance of certification in anesthesiology program. Anesthesiology. 2015;122:1154–1169. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Guan W.-.J., Ni Z.-.Y., Hu Y., Liang W.-.H., Ou C.-.Q., He J.-.X., Liu L., Shan H., Lei C.-.L., Hui D.S.C., Du B., Li L.-.J., Zeng G., Yuen K.-.Y., Chen R.-.C., Tang C.-.L., Wang T., Chen P.-.Y., Xiang J., Li S.-.Y., Wang J.-.L., Liang Z.-.J., Peng Y.-.X., Wei L., Liu Y., Hu Y.-.H., Peng P., Wang J.-.M., Liu J.-.Y., Chen Z., Li G., Zheng Z.-.J., Qiu S.-.Q., Luo J., Ye C.-.J., Zhu S.-.Y., Zhong N.-.S. C.M.T.E.G. for Covid-19, Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in china. New Engl. J. Med. 2020 doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2002032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Greenland J.R., Michelow M.D., Wang L., London M.J. COVID-19 infection: implications for perioperative and critical care physicians. Anesthesiology. 2020;132:1346–1361. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.World Health Organization . Statement on the second meeting of the international health regulations (2005) emergency committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) 2005. Geneva, Switzerland. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Wang Y., Wang Y., Chen Y., Qin Q. Unique epidemiological and clinical features of the emerging 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia (covid-19) implicate special control measures. J. Med. Virol. 2020 doi: 10.1002/jmv.25748. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Dieckmann P., Torgeirsen K., Qvindesland S.A., Thomas L., Bushell V., Langli Ersdal H. The use of simulation to prepare and improve responses to infectious disease outbreaks like covid-19: practical tips and resources from norway, denmark, and the uk. Adv. Simul. (London, Engl.) 2020;5:3. doi: 10.1186/s41077-020-00121-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Tong Q.J., Chai J.X., Tan L.H., Singh P., Ong L.T., Wu M.Y., Ng L.X.L. Assessing operating room preparedness for covid-19 patients through in-situ simulations. Anesth. Analg. 2020 doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004935. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Fregene T.E., Nadarajah P., Buckley J.F., Bigham S., Nangalia V. Use of in situ simulation to evaluate the operational readiness of a high-consequence infectious disease intensive care unit. Anaesthesia. 2020;75:733–738. doi: 10.1111/anae.15048. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Seam N., Lee A.J., Vennero M., Emlet L. Simulation training in the icu. Chest. 2019;156:1223–1233. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.07.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Levine A.I., Bryson E.O. The use of multimodality simulation in the evaluation of physicians with suspected lapsed competence. J. Crit. Care. 2008;23:197–202. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2007.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Levine A.I., Flynn B.C., Bryson E.O., Demaria S. Simulation-based maintenance of certification in anesthesiology (moca) course optimization: use of multi-modality educational activities. J. Clin. Anesth. 2012;24:68–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2011.06.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Wangsgard C.R., Baalmann D.V., Keaveny V.R., Tosh P.K., Goyal D.G., Callies B.I., Laack T.A. Simulation and lessons learned from the ebola epidemic. Educ. Health (Abingdon) 2016;29:156–157. doi: 10.4103/1357-6283.188781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.McIvor W., Burden A., Weinger M.B., Steadman R. Simulation for maintenance of certification in anesthesiology: the first two years. J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 2012;32:236–242. doi: 10.1002/chp.21151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Rogers T., Andler C., OʼBrien B., van Schaik S. Self-reported emotions in simulation-based learning: active participants vs. Observers. Simul. Healthcare J. Soc. Simul. Healthcare. 2019;14:140–145. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000354. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Foote M., Daver R., Quinn C. Using "mystery patient" drills to assess hospital ebola preparedness in new york city, 2014-2015. Health Secur. 2017;15:500–508. doi: 10.1089/hs.2016.0130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Rudolph J.W., Simon R., Dufresne R.L., Raemer D.B. There's no such thing as "nonjudgmental" debriefing: a theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simul. Healthcare J. Soc. Simula. Healthcare. 2006;1:49–55. doi: 10.1097/01266021-200600110-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Abatzis V.T., Littlewood K.E. Debriefing in simulation and beyond. Int. Anesthesiol. Clin. 2015;53:151–162. doi: 10.1097/AIA.0000000000000070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Chrimes N. The vortex: a universal ’high-acuity implementation tool’ for emergency airway management. Br. J. Anaesth. 2016;117(Suppl 1):i20–i27. doi: 10.1093/bja/aew175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Chrimes N., Higgs A., Rehak A. Lost in transition: the challenges of getting airway clinicians to move from the upper airway to the neck during an airway crisis. Br. J. Anaesth. 2020;125:e38–e46. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.04.052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Eder P.A., Reime B., Wurmb T., Kippnich U., Shammas L., Rashid A. Prehospital telemedical emergency management of severely injured trauma patients. Methods Inf. Med. 2018;57:231–242. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1681089. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.