Challenges to the implementation of in situ simulation at HEMS bases: a qualitative study of facilitators’ expectations and strategies

Advances in Simulation - 2021
Per P. Bredmose1, Doris Østergaard2, Stephen J. M. Sollid3
1Department of Research, Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation, Oslo, Norway
2Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation, Capital Region of Denmark and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
3Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

Tóm tắt

Abstract Introduction Facilitators play an essential role in simulation-based training on helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) bases. There is scant literature about the barriers to the implementation of simulation training in HEMS. The purpose of this explorative interview study was to identify factors that the local facilitators anticipated would challenge the smooth implementation of the program, and their strategies to overcome these before the national implementation of in situ simulation-based training locally, and subsequently, one year after the programme was initiated, to identify the actual challenges they had indeed experienced, and their solutions to overcome these. Methods A qualitative study with semi-structured group interviews of facilitators was undertaken before and after one year of simulation-based training on all HEMS bases and one Search and Rescue base. Systematic text condensation was used to extract facilitators’ expectations and experiences. Results Facilitators identified 17 themes in the pre-study-year interviews. Pedagogical, motivational and logistical issues were amongst the dominant themes. Other key themes included management support, dedicated time for the facilitators and ongoing development of the facilitator. In the post-study-year interviews, the same themes were identified. Despite anxiety about the perceptions of, and enthusiasm for, simulation training amongst the HEMS crews, our facilitators describe increasing levels of motivation over the study period. Conclusion Facilitators prognosticated the anticipated challenges to the successful implementation of simulation-based training on HEMS bases and suggested solutions for overcoming these challenges. After one year of simulation-based training, the facilitators reflected on the key factors for successful implementation.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Brazil V, Purdy EI, Bajaj K. Connecting simulation and quality improvement: how can healthcare simulation really improve patient care? BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2019;28(11):862–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009767.

Ajmi SC, Advani R, Fjetland L, Kurz KD, Lindner T, Qvindesland SA, et al. Reducing door-to-needle times in stroke thrombolysis to 13 min through protocol revision and simulation training: a quality improvement project in a Norwegian stroke centre. BMJ quality & safety. 2019;28(11):939–48. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-009117.

Härgestam M, Lindkvist M, Jacobsson M, Brulin C, Hultin M. Trauma teams and time to early management during in situ trauma team training. BMJ open. 2016;6(1):e009911. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009911.

Josey K, Smith ML, Kayani AS, Young G, Kasperski MD, Farrer P, et al. Hospitals with more-active participation in conducting sstandardised in-situ mock codes have improved survival after in-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest. Resuscitation. 2018;133:47–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.09.020.

Bredmose PP, Habig K, Davies G, Grier G, Lockey DJ. Scenario based outdoor simulation in pre-hospital trauma care using a simple mannequin model. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010;18(1):13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-18-13.

Bredmose PP, Hagemo J, Røislien J, Østergaard D, Sollid S. In situ simulation training in helicopter emergency medical services: feasible for on-call crews? Adv Simul (Lond). 2020;5(1):7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-020-00126-0.

Abelsson A, Rystedt I, Suserud B-O, Lindwall L. Mapping the use of simulation in prehospital care – a literature review. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2014;22(1):22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-22-22.

Lazzara EH, Benishek LE, Dietz AS, Salas E, Adriansen DJ. Eight critical factors in creating and implementing a successful simulation program. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2014;40(1):21–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(14)40003-5.

Salas E, Wilson KA, Lazzara EH, King HB, Augenstein JS, Robinson DW, et al. Simulation-based training for patient safety: 10 principles that matter. J Patient Safety. 2008;4(1):3–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0b013e3181656dd6.

Spurr J, Gatward J, Joshi N, Carley SD. Top 10 (+1) tips to get started with in situ simulation in emergency and critical care departments. Emerg Med J. 2016;33(7):514–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2015-204845.

Tariq U, Sood M, Goodsman D. The facilitator’s role in London’s air ambulance’s simulation “moulage” training. Air Med J. 2015;34(2):92–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amj.2014.12.012.

Fraser KL, Meguerdichian MJ, Haws JT, Grant VJ, Bajaj K, Cheng A. Cognitive Load Theory for debriefing simulations: implications for faculty development. Advances in Simulation. 2018;3(1):28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-018-0086-1.

Forstrønen A, Johnsgaard T, Brattebø G, Reime MH. Developing facilitator competence in scenario-based medical simulation: presentation and evaluation of a train the trainer course in Bergen Norway. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020;47:102840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102840.

Bredmose PP, Røislien J, Østergaard D, Sollid S. National implementation of in situ simulation-based training in helicopter emergency medical services: a multicenter study. Air Med J. 2021;40(4):205–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amj.2021.04.006.

DeJonckheere M, Vaughn LM. Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: a balance of relationship and rigour. Family Medicine and Community Health. 2019;7(2):e000057. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2018-000057.

Kvale S: Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing, thousandvaks. In.: London, new Dehli, and Soge Publications; 1996.

EuSim course description [https://eusim.org/courses/#EuSim simulation instructor course]

Powell RA, Single HM. Focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 1996;8(5):499–504. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/8.5.499.

Naderifar M, Goli H, Ghaljaie F: Snowball sampling: a purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research. Strides in Development of Medical Education 2017, 14(3) 14, 3, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670.

Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. The Lancet. 2001;358(9280):483–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: a strategy for qualitative analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40(8):795–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494812465030.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.

Cheng A, Grant V, Huffman J, Burgess G, Szyld D, Robinson T, et al. Coaching the debriefer: peer coaching to improve debriefing quality in simulation programs. Simul Healthc. 2017;12(5):319–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000232.

Hosny SG, Johnston MJ, Pucher PH, Erridge S, Darzi A. Barriers to the implementation and uptake of simulation-based training programs in general surgery: a multinational qualitative study. J Surg Res. 2017;220:419–426.e412.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Advances in Simulation

Thông tin tác giả