We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Training emergency department (ED) personnel in the care of victims of mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) is a highly challenging task requiring unique and innovative approaches. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively explore the value of high-fidelity simulators in an exercise that incorporates time and resource limitation as an optimal method of training health care personnel in mass-casualty care.
Methods:
Mass-casualty injury patterns from an explosive blast event were simulated for 12 victims using high-fidelity computerized simulators (HFCS). Programmed outcomes, based on the nature of injuries and conduct of participants, ranged from successful resuscitation and survival to death. The training exercise was conducted five times with different teams of health care personnel (n = 42). The exercise involved limited time and resources such as blood, ventilators, and imaging capability. Medical team performance was observed and recorded. Following the exercise, participants completed a survey regarding their training satisfaction, quality of the exercise, and their prior experiences with MCI simulations. The Likert scale responses from the survey were evaluated using mean with 95% confidence interval, as well as median and inter-quartile range. For the categorical responses, the frequency, proportions, and associated 95% confidence interval were calculated.
Results:
The mean rating on the quality of experiences related trainee survey questions (n = 42) was between 4.1 and 4.6 on a scale of 5.0. The mean ratings on a scale of 10.0 for quality, usefulness, and pertinence of the program were 9.2, 9.5, and 9.5, respectfully. One hundred percent of respondents believed that this type of exercise should be required for MCI training and would recommend this exercise to colleagues. The five medical team (n = 5) performances resulted in the number of deaths ranging from two (including the expectant victims) to six. Eighty percent of medical teams attempted to resuscitate the “expectant” infant and exhausted the O- blood supply. Sixty percent of medical teams depleted the supply of ventilators. Forty percent of medical teams treated “delayed” victims too early.
Conclusion:
A training exercise using HFCS for mass casualties and employing limited time and resources is described. This exercise is a preferred method of training among participating health care personnel.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.