Maintaining competence in airway management
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Maintaining competence in airway management. / Bessmann, Ebbe L.; Rasmussen, Lars S.; Konge, Lars; Kristensen, Michael S.; Rewers, Mikael; Østergaard, Doris; 12 Airway Management Education Study Group; Kotinis, Alexandros; Mitchell, Anja Ulrike; Munksgaard, Anne Birgitte Friis; Schousboe, Birgitte Marie Bonne; Rosenstock, Charlotte Vallentin; Nielsen, Jonas; Frederiksen, Hans Jørgen; Graeser, Karin; Larsen, Per Bo; Pfeiffer, Peter; Lauritsen, Torsten.
In: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, Vol. 64, No. 6, 07.2020, p. 751-758.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Maintaining competence in airway management
AU - Bessmann, Ebbe L.
AU - Rasmussen, Lars S.
AU - Konge, Lars
AU - Kristensen, Michael S.
AU - Rewers, Mikael
AU - Østergaard, Doris
AU - 12 Airway Management Education Study Group
AU - Kotinis, Alexandros
AU - Mitchell, Anja Ulrike
AU - Munksgaard, Anne Birgitte Friis
AU - Schousboe, Birgitte Marie Bonne
AU - Rosenstock, Charlotte Vallentin
AU - Nielsen, Jonas
AU - Frederiksen, Hans Jørgen
AU - Graeser, Karin
AU - Larsen, Per Bo
AU - Pfeiffer, Peter
AU - Lauritsen, Torsten
PY - 2020/7
Y1 - 2020/7
N2 - Background: Airway management is a defining skill for anaesthesiologists. Anaesthesiologists must maintain and update these crucial skills throughout their career, but how this is best achieved remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify anaesthesiologists’ procedural volume, confidence in airway management and their current and preferred future educational strategies. Methods: A questionnaire was developed consisting of 28 items exploring essential skills in airway management. All anaesthesiologists in the Capital Region of Denmark were invited to participate. Results: The response rate was 84% (240/285). Most anaesthesiologists felt competent to a high or very high degree in basic airway management. Anaesthesiologists from anaesthesia felt confident to a significantly higher degree than those working in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding the practical aspects of airway management in both the anticipated difficult airway (93% vs 73%, P <.001) and the unanticipated difficult airway (81% vs 61%, P =.002). Both groups performed most of the key advanced techniques ≤4 times yearly, whereas anaesthesiologists from the ICU had a lower and less diverse procedural volume than those working in anaesthesia. The anaesthesiologists preferred training through their daily clinical work, hands-on workshops, and scenario-based simulation training. However, a large discrepancy was identified between the current and the desired level of training. Conclusion: The anaesthesiologists felt competent to a high or very high degree in basic airway management but the current procedural volume in advanced airway management causes concern for skill maintenance. Furthermore, we found a gap between the current and the desired level of supplemental training.
AB - Background: Airway management is a defining skill for anaesthesiologists. Anaesthesiologists must maintain and update these crucial skills throughout their career, but how this is best achieved remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify anaesthesiologists’ procedural volume, confidence in airway management and their current and preferred future educational strategies. Methods: A questionnaire was developed consisting of 28 items exploring essential skills in airway management. All anaesthesiologists in the Capital Region of Denmark were invited to participate. Results: The response rate was 84% (240/285). Most anaesthesiologists felt competent to a high or very high degree in basic airway management. Anaesthesiologists from anaesthesia felt confident to a significantly higher degree than those working in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding the practical aspects of airway management in both the anticipated difficult airway (93% vs 73%, P <.001) and the unanticipated difficult airway (81% vs 61%, P =.002). Both groups performed most of the key advanced techniques ≤4 times yearly, whereas anaesthesiologists from the ICU had a lower and less diverse procedural volume than those working in anaesthesia. The anaesthesiologists preferred training through their daily clinical work, hands-on workshops, and scenario-based simulation training. However, a large discrepancy was identified between the current and the desired level of training. Conclusion: The anaesthesiologists felt competent to a high or very high degree in basic airway management but the current procedural volume in advanced airway management causes concern for skill maintenance. Furthermore, we found a gap between the current and the desired level of supplemental training.
U2 - 10.1111/aas.13558
DO - 10.1111/aas.13558
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 32034955
AN - SCOPUS:85081259600
VL - 64
SP - 751
EP - 758
JO - Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
JF - Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
SN - 0001-5172
IS - 6
ER -
ID: 244324445