Postresuscitation debriefing in the pediatric emergency department: a national needs assessment

  • Sandhu N
  • Eppich W
  • et al.
65Citations
Citations of this article
107Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives:The objectives of this study were to assess current postresuscitation debriefing (PRD) practices in Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs) and identify areas for improvement.Methods:A national needs assessment survey was conducted to collect information on current PRD practices and perspectives on debriefing practice in pediatric EDs. A questionnaire was distributed to ED nurses, fellows, and attending physicians at 10 pediatric tertiary care hospitals across Canada. Summary statistics are reported.Results:Data were analyzed from 183 participants (48.7% response rate). Although 88.8% of the participants believed that debriefing is an important process, 52.5% indicated that debriefing after real resuscitations occurs less than 25% of the time and 68.3% indicated that no expectation exists for PRD at their institution. Although 83.7% of participants believed that facilitators should have a specific skill set developed through formal training sessions, 63.4% had no previous training in debriefing. Seventy-two percent felt that medical and crisis resource management issues are dealt with adequately when PRD occurs, and 90.4% indicated that ED workload and time shortages are major barriers to effective debriefing. Most responded that a debriefing tool to guide facilitators might aid in multiple skills, such as creating realistic debriefing objectives and providing feedback with good judgment.Conclusion:PRD in Canadian pediatric EDs occurs infrequently, although most health care providers agreed on its importance and the need for skilled facilitators.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sandhu, N., Eppich, W., Mikrogianakis, A., Grant, V., Robinson, T., & Cheng, A. (2014). Postresuscitation debriefing in the pediatric emergency department: a national needs assessment. CJEM, 16(05), 383–392. https://doi.org/10.2310/8000.2013.131136

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free