This process included review and discussion of HR scoring definitions, followed by independent scoring of 5 resuscitation scenarios.
The two raters agreed on 117 of 120 (97%) of HR scores.
Our Institutional Review Board provided exempt status for this educational intervention.
The NRP Megacode checklist and a previously established scoring instrument have both been cited in the literature, with several reports evaluating their validity [10, 11].
The cookies contain no personally identifiable information and have no effect once you leave the Medscape site.
Department of Medical Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USAReceived 12 February 2014; Revised 8 April 2014; Accepted 10 April 2014; Published 30 April 2014Academic Editor: Patrick Brophy Copyright © 2014 Win Boon et al.
Data were subsequently deidentified for statistical analysis.
We evaluated HR assessments at three key time points during NR: (1) heart rate assessment #1: initial HR check at birth, (2) heart rate assessment #2: HR check to assess response to resuscitative measures beyond the initial steps of warming/drying/stimulating the infant (i.e., after initiation of PPV), and (3) heart rate assessment #3: HR check after continued resuscitative measures.
The simulator’s actual HR, trainee’s method of HR assessment (auscultation, palpation, or both), timeliness, communication to the lead resuscitator, and accuracy of each HR check were tracked.
We designed standardized simulation scenarios, based on the Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) 5th edition curriculum, by adapting scenarios associated with the Sim New B Advanced high fidelity neonatal simulator (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway).
Features of our standardized cases included the need to assess HR and respiratory effort and required house officers to make decisions regarding performing PPV, endotracheal intubation, and chest compressions.