The Science Journal of the American Association for Respiratory Care

2012 OPEN FORUM Abstracts

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF A VOLUMETRIC DIFFUSIVE RESPIRATOR EDUCATION PROGRAM.

Patricia A. Achuff1, Rita Giordano1, Cheryl Dominick1, Roberta Hales2; 1Respiratory Care, The ChildrenÂ’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; 2Center for Simulation, Advanced Education & Innovation, The ChildrenÂ’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA

Background: The Volumetric Diffusive Respirator (VDR) is a precise, synchronized, high and low frequency time cycled ventilator. A change in one ventilator setting affects other settings simultaneously. Use of this ventilator requires increased knowledge, skill, and training. A decision was made to initiate a small VDR user team to maintain consistent language and standard practice, and to observe patient safety goals. 14 staff members were selected as VDR user team. 7 staff members traveled to Sandpoint, Idaho for additional training at Forrest Bird compound. Traditional and kinesthetic learning methods were chosen to instruct user team. Method: From materials received at training, power point presentations covering topics of VDR setup, ventilator overview, and management strategies, were created for hands on workshops. A VDR simulation program was developed to assess use of consistent language and standard practice. The scenario, based on an actual patient requiring VDR for secretion removal after failing oscillator with nitric oxide, included arterial blood gas results requiring interventions and setting changes. One qualified observer utilized a 35 item checklist, including technical and non-technical skills, to evaluate participant performance. A 17 question evaluation survey was distributed via Zoomerang online software to all who attended the simulation. Survey sample contained 10 VDR user team members. Results: All 10 VDR user team members completed the survey. 70% (30% strongly agree, 40% agree) of respondents felt more prepared to set up the VDR in clinical after simulation. 77% (33% strongly agree, 44% agree) felt clinical performance skills with the VDR improved. 70% (30% strongly agree, 40% agree) were more confident suggesting the VDR in clinical after simulation. 66% (33% strongly agree, 33% agree) were more confident choosing/changing VDR settings. 77% (33% strongly agree, 44% agree) found critical thinking skills associated with VDR strategies improved. 80% (30% strongly agree, 50% agree) thought the VDR simulation was appropriately challenging. 90% (30% strongly agree, 60% agree) considered the VDR simulation a positive learning experience. Conclusions: Simulation training is a challenging, positive, and effective learning method to increase knowledge and skills for the VDR. Sponsored Research - None