2006 OPEN FORUM Abstracts
Evaluation of Inservicing and Electronic References as an Effective Method to Educate Respiratory Care Staff on Infrequently Used Ventilator Modes.
Joel M Brown
II BS RRT, John Emberger BS RRT.
Department of Respiratory Care Christiana Care Health System
Background: Often RCP's request inservices on ventilator
modes and therapies that are rarely ordered.
When providing education for infrequently used therapies it is very
important for the staff development team to select a process that will be
effective and lasting. In this study we
evaluated the effectiveness of inservicing only vs. inservicing and electronic
reference in order to maximize our educational efforts.
Methods: We set up a series of mandatory inservices
on APRV for our staff. Upon the
completion of the inservices we placed a revised version of the presentation on
our internal departmental web site. For
PCV we offered education during RCP orientation and periodic departmental
inservicing. A Critical Care Staff Self Assessment and Simulated Performance Lab
was developed from a list of 26 critical care objectives including: APRV and PCV.
The self assessment and case scenario were scored with the following one
through four scale: 1= unable to perform objective, 2= able to perform
objective with instruction, 3= able to perform objective with a reference, 4=
able to perform objective. The results
from the staff self assessment were automatically electronically
collected. All RCP's who scored
themselves less than three on the staff self assessment were sent an education
packet on that topic. The RCP had a time
period to review the education materials and then the performance labs were
scheduled. Both the assessment and performance
lab scenario were scored and the results were compiled. Ventilator mode days were retrieved from our
hospital data base to compare the RCP's clinical exposure to each mode.
Results:
In an 8 month period we had a total of 10656 ventilator days in our
facility. APRV was ordered for 87 ventilator
days (0.8% of total) and PCV was ordered for 229 ventilator days (2.1% of
total). 83 out of 83 ICU eligible
RCP's completed both segments of the evaluation tool. Results from the Staff Self Assessment and Simulated
Clinical Performance were scored. RCP's
scored themselves higher in PCV than for APRV.
But the RCP's performed higher in APRV.
Conclusion: Although APRV is a rarely used mode of
ventilation in our facility the staff scored well in simulated performance
lab. In contrast, PCV is ordered more
than APRV but the staff score lower in the simulated performance lab. Both of theses modes received inservicing but
there was an electronic reference available for APRV. Based on our data it appears that inservices in
conjunction with electronic references is an effective method to educate RCP's
on infrequently used ventilator modes. Inservicing
gives the staff a knowledge base of the ventilator modalities while the electronic
references offer access to information that reinforces that knowledge base.