Performance Enhancement in Anesthesia Using the Training Simulator Sophus (Peanuts)

  • John Jacobsen
  • Per F. Jensen
  • Doris Ostergaard
  • Astrid Lindekær
  • Anne Lippert
  • Peter Schultz

Abstract

Although anesthesia today is a safe procedure, complications do arise. Several studies have tried to evaluate mortality and the frequency of complications in relation to operation and anesthesia.1,2 In 14% of reported incidences the anesthesia in itself is considered to be a contributory factor. The major part of this factor is human error. Systematic collection of critical incidents “The Critical Incident Technique” was adopted from aviation and used for the first time in anesthesia by Cooper et al in 1978.3 It was found like in aviation, that at least half of the reported critical incidents in the study was caused by human factors, mostly lack of knowledge about equipment in use and communication and/or leadership errors. In aviation this has lead to the development of simulators where it is possible to train both manual skills and aspects of communication, cooperation and leadership (the CRM concept). As there are some similarities between aviation and anesthesia the CRM concept has been transferred to anesthesia by Howard and Gaba by the use of simulators.4 It has been shown that using simulators can improve performance.5

Keywords

Abdominal Aorta Aneurysm Critical Incident Simulator Training Team Spirit Critical Incident Technique 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Petersen T, Eliasen K, Henriksen E. A prospective study of risk factors and cardiopulmonary complications associated with anaesthesia and surgery: risk indicators of cardiopulmonary morbidity. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1990; 34:144–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Duncan PG, Cohen MM, Tweed WA, Biehl D, Pope WD, Merchant RN, DeBoer D. The Canadian four centre study of anaesthetic outcome: III. Are anaesthetic complications predictable in day surgical practice? Can J Anaesth 1992; 39:440–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cooper JB, Newbower RS, Long CD, McPeek B. Preventable anesthesia mishaps: a study of human factors. Anesthesiology 1978; 49:399–406.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Howard SK, Gaba DM, Fish KJ, Yang G, Sarnquist FH. Anesthesia crisis resource management training: teaching anesthesiologists to handle critical incidents. Aviation Space & Environmental Medicine 1992; 63:763–770.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chopra V, Gesink BJ, De Jong J, Bovili JG, Spierdijk J, Brand R. Does training on an anaesthesia simulator lead to improvement in performance? Br J Anaesth 1994; 73:293–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Jacobsen
    • 1
  • Per F. Jensen
    • 1
  • Doris Ostergaard
    • 2
  • Astrid Lindekær
    • 3
  • Anne Lippert
    • 3
  • Peter Schultz
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Anesthesiology, Herlev HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen CountyDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology, Gentofte HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen CountyDenmark
  3. 3.Department of Anesthesiology, Glostrup HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen CountyDenmark

Personalised recommendations