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.