Eun Jung Kim; Kyeong Ryong Lee

doi:10.7469/kjan.2015.27.2.146

Journal List > Korean J Adult Nurs > v.27(2) > 1076312

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim and Lee: Relationship between Non-technical Skills and Resuscitation Performance of Nurses’ Team in in-situ Simulated Cardiac Arrest

Original Article

Korean J Adult Nurs 2015;27(2):146-155.

Published online: NaN April 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7469/kjan.2015.27.2.146

Relationship between Non-technical Skills and Resuscitation Performance of Nurses’ Team in in-situ Simulated Cardiac Arrest

Eun Jung Kim¹, Kyeong Ryong Lee²

^¹Division of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, HallymUniversity, Chuncheon

^²Department of Emergency Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Corresponding author: Kim, Eun Jung Division of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Hallym University, 1 Hallymdaehak-gil, Chuncheon 200-702, Korea. Tel: +82-33-248-2725, Fax: +82-33-248-2734, E-mail: ejerkim@hallym.ac.kr

Received 20 November 201425 March 2015 Accepted 27 March 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this descriptive study was to explore the relationship between non-technical skills (NTSs) andcardiopulmonaryresuscitation(CPR)performanceof nurses' teams insimulatedcardiacarrest inthehospital.

Methods

Thesample was 28teams of nurses inoneuniversity hospital located in Seoul. A high fidelity simulator was used toenact simulated cardiacarrest. The nurse teams were scored by raters using both the CPR performance checklist and the NTSs checklist. Specifically the CPR performance checklist included critical actions; time elapsed to initiation of critical actions, and quality of cardiac compression. The NTSs checklist was comprised of leadership, communication, mutual performance monitoring, maintenance of guideline, and task management. Data were collected directly from manikin and video recordings.

Results

There was a significant difference between the medians of the NTSs and CPR performance (Mann WhitneyU=43.5, p=.014). In five subcategories, communication (p=.026), mutual performance monitoring (p=.005), and maintenance of guideline (p=.003) dif-feredsignificantlywithCPR performance inmedians. Leadership(p=.053) andtaskmanagement (p=.080) were not significantlydifferent withCPR performance.

Conclusion

Thefindings indicate that NTSsof teams inaddition to technical skills of individual rescuers affect the outcome of CPR. NTSs development andassessment should be considered an integral part of resuscitation training.

Keywords: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, Leadership, Team behavior, Patient simulation

REFERENCES

1.Marsch SC., Tschan F., Semmer N., Spychiger M., Breuer M., Hunziker PR. Performance of first responders in simulated cardiac arrests. Critical Care Medicine. 2005. 33(5):963–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000157750.43459.07.

2.Hunziker S., Johansson AC., Tschan F., Semmer NK., Rock L., Howell MD, et al. Teamwork and leadership in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2011. 57(24):2381–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.03.017.

3.Abella BS., Alvarado JP., Myklebust H., Edelson DP., Barry A., O'Hearn N, et al. Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during in-hospital cardiac arrest. The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005. 293(3):305–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.3.305.

4.Einav S., Shleifer A., Kark JD., Landesberge G., Matot I. Performance of department staff in the window between discovery of collapse to cardiac arrest team arrival. Resuscitation. 2006. 69(2):213–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.09.015.

5.Hunt EA., Walker AR., Shaffner DH., Miller MR., Pronovost PJ. Simulation of in-hospital pediatric medical emergencies and cardiopulmonary arrests: highlighting the importance of the first 5 minutes. Pediatrics. 2008. 121:e34–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-0029.

6.Marsch SC., Muller C., Marquardt K., Conrad G., Tschan F., Hun-ziker PR. Human factors affect the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in simulated cardiac arrests. Resuscitation. 2004. 60(1):51–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2003.08.004.

7.Flin R., Maran N. Identifying and training non-technical skills for teams inacutemedicine. Quality andSafety inHealthCare. 2004. 13:i80–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2004.009993.

8.Mitchell L., Flin R. Non-technicalskills ofthe operating theatre scrub nurse: literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2008. 63(1):15–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04695.x.

9.Yule S., Flin R., Maran N., Paterson-Brown S. Non-technicalskills for surgeons in the operating room: a review of the literature. Surgery. 2006. 139(2):140–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.06.017.

10.Fletcher G., McGeorge P., Flin R., Glavin R, Maran N. Anaesthetists'non-technical skills(ANTS): evaluation of a behavioural marker system. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2003. 90(5):580–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeg112.

11.Andersen P., Jensen MK., Lippert A., O/stergaard D. Identifying non-technical skills and barriers for improvement of teamwork in cardiac arrest teams. Resuscitation. 2010. 81(6):695–702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.01.024.

12.Walker S., Brett S., McKay A., Lambden S., Vincent C., Sevdalis N. Observation skill-based clinical assessment tool for resuscitation (OSCAR): development and validation. Resuscitation. 2011. 82(7):835–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.03.009.

13.Cooper S., Cant R., Porter J. Rating emergency teamwork performance development of the team emergency assessment mea-sure(TEAM). Resuscitation. 2010. 81(4):446–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.11.027.

14.Kim JY., Jun SS., Kim DH., Choi SS. Knowledge and attitude toward BLS and provided CPR education among nurses at general wards in Pusan. Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamental Nursing. 2008. 15(2):143–52.

15.Oh SI., Han SS. A study on the sustainable effects of reeducation on cardiopulmonary resuscitation on nurses'knowledge and skills. Journal of Korean Academic Nursing. 2008. 38(3):383–92.

16.Park JS., Jeon HR. The effect of basic life support education using a standardized basic life support video program in nurses' cardiopulmonary resuscitation knowledge, attitude and performance. The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education. 2010. 16(2):301–11.

17.Pyo MY., Kim JY., Sohn JO., Lee ES., Kim HS., Kim KO, et al. The effects of an advanced cardiac life support training via smart phone's simulation application on nurses' knowledge and learning satisfaction. Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research. 2012. 18(2):228–38.

18.Basic life support for healthcare providers. Dallas, TX: American Heart Association;2010.

19.Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research. 1986. 35(6):382–5.

20.Kim EJ., Lee KR., Lee MH., Kim JY. Nurses' cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance during the first 5 minutes in in-situ simulated cardiac arrest. Journal of Korean Academic Nursing. 2010. 42(3):361–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2012.42.3.361.

21.Hunziker S., Buhlmann C., Tschan F., Balestra G., Legeret C., Schumacher C, et al. Brief leadership instructions improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a high-fidelity simulation: a randomized controlled trial. Critical Care Medicine. 2010. 38(4):1086–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181cf7383̈.

22.Siassakos D., Bristowe K., Draycott TJ., Angouri J., Hambly H., Winter C, et al. Clinical efficiency in a simulated emergency and relationship to team behaviours: a multisite cross-sectional study. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2011. 118(5):596–607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02843.x.

23.Yeung JH., Ong GJ., Davies RP., Gao F., Perkins GD. Factors affecting team leadership skills and their relationship with quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Critical Care Medicine. 2012. 40(9):2617–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182591fda.

24.Cooper SJR., Wakelam A. Leadership of resuscitation teams: “lighthouse leadership.” Resuscitation. 1999. 42(1):27–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9572(99)00080-5.

25.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Team strategies & tools to enhance performance and patient safety [Internet]. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [cited 2014 June 23]. Available from:. http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/education/curriculum-tools/teamstepps/instructor/essentials/pocketguide.pdf.

26.Gilligan P., Bhatarcharjee C., Knight G., Smith M., Hegarty D., Shenton A, et al. To lead or not to lead?: prospective control-ledstudyofemergencynurses' provision of advanced life support team leadership. Emergency Medicine Journal. 2005. 22(9):628–32.

27.Norris EM., Lockey AS. Human factors in resuscitation teaching. Resuscitation. 2012. 83(4):423–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.11.001.

28.Chan PS., Krumholz HM., Nichol G., Nallamothu BK. Delayed time to defibrillation after in-hospital cardiac arrest. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2008. 358(1):9–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0706467.

Table 1.

Nurses' CPR Performance Scales

Items	Critical action	Range of scores	Scale
Items	Critical action	Range of scores	0	1	2	3
Assessment	Check unresponsiveness	0~1	no	yes
	Call for help	0~1	no	yes
	Check pulse	0~1	no	yes
Start CPR	Time to initiate chest compression	0~2	60 sec ＞	30~60 sec	30 sec ＜
	Apply back board	0~2	no	incorrect	correct
	Initiate BVM ventilation	0~2	no	incorrect	correct
	Connect to oxygen	0~2	no	incorrect	correct
Quality of CPR	Mean rate of correct compression rate (%)	0~3	NC	50% ＜	50~80%	80% ＞
	Mean rate of correct placement of hands (%)	0~3	NC	50% ＜	50~80%	80% ＞
	Mean rate of correct compression depth (%)	0~3	NC	50% ＜	50~80%	80% ＞
	Mean rate of full chest recoil (%)	0~3	NC	50% ＜	50~80%	80% ＞
	30 compression and 2 ventilation	0~2	NC or BVM	incorrect	correct
	Hands off time^†	0~2	2 min ＞	1~2 min	1 min ＜
Defibrillation	Check ECG rhythm	0~2	no	incorrect	correct
	Give a shock (defibrillation)	0, 2	no		yes
	Select a shock energy and charge	0~1	no or incorrect	correct
	Place the defibrillator paddle in AP	0~1	no	yes
	Clear the victim before delivering a shock	0~1	no	yes
	Time to deliver first shock	0~2	no shock	2min ＞	2 min ＜
Drug	Administer epinephrine	0~1	no	yes

CPR=cardiopulmonary resuscitation; BVM=bag valve mask; ECG=electrocardiography; NC=no compression; AP=appropriate position;

^† Total compression interruption time during 5 minutes.

Table 2.

Non-technical Skills Rating during 5 minutes Simulated Cardiac Arrest (N=28)

Variables	Behavior marker	None	Incomplete or untimely	Complete & timely
Variables	Behavior marker	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)
Leadership	Clearly identified in team	2 (7.1)	12 (42.9)	14 (50.0)
	Communicate efficiently	6 (21.4)	15 (53.6)	7 (25.0)
	Delegate (distribute) tasks	6 (21.4)	12 (42.9)	10 (35.7)
	Manage workload and resource	11 (39.3)	4 (14.3)	13 (46.4)
Communication	Use closed loop communication (check-back)	9 (32.1)	5 (17.9)	13 (46.4)
Communication	Call for help appropriate/think out loudly	8 (28.6)	7 (25.0)	13 (46.4)
Mutual performance monitoring	Unnecessary hand-off time corrected	19 (67.9)	4 (14.3)	5 (17.9)
	Hyper- or hypoventilation corrected	23 (82.1)	3 (10.7)	2 (7.1)
	Check & speak out the rhythm	8 (28.6)	5 (17.9)	15 (53.6)
	Knowledge sharing, situation monitoring	12 (42.9)	5 (17.9)	11 (39.3)
Maintaining of standards and guideline	Defibrillation is performed safely	10 (35.7)	5 (17.9)	13 (46.4)
	Change person performing chest compression	7 (25.0)	4 (14.3)	17 (60.7)
	every 2 min.
	Ensuring cardiac rhythm after 5 cycles	9 (32.1)	7 (25.0)	12 (42.9)
Task management	Back-up behavior provided as needed (support other team members)	2 (7.1)	7 (25.0)	19 (67.9)
Task management	All team members contribute with behavior	2 (7.1)	3 (10.7)	23 (82.1)

Table 3.

Nurses' CPR Performance Scores during 5 minutes Simulated Cardiac Arrest (N=28)

Variables	Critical action	Scale				M±SD (possible range)
		0	1	2	3
		n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)
Assessment	Check unresponsiveness	0 (0.0)	28 (100.0)			2.50±0.58
	Call for help	1 (3.6)	27 (96.4)			(0~3)
	Check pulse	13 (46.4)	15 (53.6)			(0~3)
Start CPR	Time to initiate chest compression	3 (10.7)	5 (17.9)	20 (71.4)		5.57±1.83
	Apply back board	6 (21.4)	7 (25.0)	15 (53.6)		(0~8)
	Initiate BVM ventilation	1 (3.6)	16 (57.2)	11 (39.3)
	Connect to oxygen	9 (32.1)	1 (3.6)	18 (64.3)
Quality of CPR	Mean rate of correct compression rate (%)	5 (17.9)	21 (75.0)	3 (10.7)	4 (14.3)	11.28±1.36
	Mean rate of correct placement of hands (%)		4 (14.3)	7 (25.0)	17 (60.7)	(0~16)
	Mean rate of correct compression depth (%)		13 (46.4)	9 (32.1)	6 (21.4)
	Mean rate of full chest recoil (%)		6 (21.4)	22 (78.6)	28 (100.0)
	30 compression and 2 ventilation		21 (75.0)	2 (7.1)
	Hands off time^†
Defibrillation	Check ECG rhythm	7 (25.0)	6 (21.4)	15 (53.6)		6.07±3.05
	Give a shock (defibrillation)	5 (17.9)	21 (75.0)	23 (82.1)		(0~9)
	Select a shock energy and charge	7 (25.0)	20 (71.4)
	Place the defibrillator paddle in AP	8 (28.6)	20 (71.4)
	Clear the victim before delivering a shock	8 (28.6)	23 (82.1)
	Time to deliver first shock	5 (17.9)
Drug	Administer epinephrine	15 (53.6)	13 (46.4)			NA
Total scores						27.32±4.59

CPR=cardiopulmonary resuscitation; BVM=bag valve mask; ECG=electrocardiography; AP=appropriate position; NA=not applicable;

^† Total compression interruption time during 5 minutes.

Table 4.

Association NTSs and CPR Performance during 5 minutes Simulated Cardiac Arrest (N=28)

Variables	Groups	CPR performance Median (IQR)	Mann- Whitney U	Z	p
Total NTSs	Better (n=16)	29.5 (27.0~31.8)	43.5	-2.447	.014
Total NTSs	Worse (n=12)	25.0 (23.0~28.8)	43.5	-2.447	.014
Leadership	Better (n=14)	29.5 (26.8~31.3)	56.0	-1.938	.053
Leadership	Worse (n=14)	25.5 (22.8~29.3)	56.0	-1.938	.053
Communication	Better (n=15)	30.0 (27.0~32.0)	49.5	-2.220	.026
Communication	Worse (n=13)	26.0 (24.0~28.5)	49.5	-2.220	.026
Mutual performance monitoring	Better (n=18)	30.0 (26.75~32.0)	31.5	-2.816	.005
Mutual performance monitoring	Worse (n=10)	25.0 (21.5~28.3)	31.5	-2.816	.005
Maintaining of standards and guideline	Better (n=17)	30.0 (27.0~32.0)	30.5	-2.975	.003
Maintaining of standards and guideline	Worse (n=11)	25.0 (23.0~28.0)	30.5	-2.975	.003
Task management	Better (n=19)	29.0 (25.0~32.0)	50.0	-1.753	.080
Task management	Worse (n=9)	26.0 (21.0~29.0)	50.0	-1.753	.080

NTSs=non-technical skills; CPR=cardiopulmonary resuscitation; IQR=interquartile range.

TOOLS

Similar articles