Training practices in neonatal and paediatric life support: A survey among healthcare professionals working in paediatrics

Mathijs Binkhorst,Inge M Van Der Aar,Marjolein Linders,Arno F.J Van Heijst,Willem P De Boode,Jos M.T Draaisma,Marije Hogeveen

doi:10.1016/j.resplu.2020.100063

Mathijs Binkhorst, Inge M Van Der Aar + Show 5 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2020.100063

Copy DOI

Abstract

AimTo evaluate neonatal and paediatric life support training practices across Europe. MethodsWe conducted a descriptive study. Paediatric residents, general paediatricians, and subspecialists were surveyed to assess how paediatric basic and advanced life support (PBLS/PALS) and neonatal life support (NLS) are practically arranged and utilised throughout Europe. A mini-Delphi approach was used for survey development. Eligible professionals in general and university hospitals received a web link to the survey. Results498 respondents from 16 countries were included. A large majority of responses came from the Netherlands (n=393) and Belgium (n=42). Therefore, analysis was based on these responses. PBLS was more frequently offered than PALS and NLS, though not to all professionals caring for children. For PBLS, PALS, and NLS, official recertification varied between 35–75%. Approximately 80–90% had read the latest guidelines, at least partially. Sixty to seventy percent felt capable of instant PALS, 75–90% considered themselves able to perform PBLS and NLS instantly. Not reading the guidelines and less confidence about instant resuscitation seemed to occur more often in the lower and higher age/experience groups compared to the intermediate age/experience groups. A quarter of the respondents <30 years did not feel prepared for instant PALS. General paediatricians appeared to feel most capable of instant resuscitation. General and university hospitals had rather similar training practices and facilities. Manikins were predominantly low-fidelity, especially in general hospitals. Barriers to course participation were high costs, lack of time, the non-compulsory status, remote location, and unavailability of courses. ConclusionAlthough most paediatric professionals receive life support training, guideline reading, recertification, training utilisation, and resuscitation preparedness require improvement. Barriers to course participation should be addressed.

Highlights

Given the rarity of neonatal and paediatric resuscitations and developments such as restricted duty hours and subspecialisation, many residents and paediatricians are insufficiently exposed to reallife resuscitations to maintain their knowledge and skills regarding basic and advanced life support.[1,2] To ensure adequate acquisition and retention of resuscitative skills, simulation-based training (SBT) is often employed
In order to describe the methodology of our online survey with sufficient detail, we reported our study according to the recommendations provided in the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet ESurveys (CHERRIES) statement.[13] final survey consisted of 13 pages with a total of 52 items, divided over the subheadings Background information, paediatric basic life support (PBLS), paediatric advanced life support (PALS), neonatal life support (NLS), and General items, and was approved by the mini-Delphi panel (Electronic Supplementary material 1)
A minority of the hospitals offered PBLS to all professionals caring for children

Summary

Introduction

Given the rarity of neonatal and paediatric resuscitations and developments such as restricted duty hours and subspecialisation, many residents and paediatricians are insufficiently exposed to reallife resuscitations to maintain their knowledge and skills regarding basic and advanced life support.[1,2] To ensure adequate acquisition and retention of resuscitative skills, simulation-based training (SBT) is often employed. The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) issues guidelines for neonatal life support (NLS), paediatric basic life support (PBLS), and paediatric advanced life support (PALS), including recommendations for the education and implementation of these guidelines.[6,9,10] The information contained in these guidelines is meant to be conveyed to the end users by certified instructors during well-designed resuscitation courses and regular local booster sessions. We wanted to know how neonatal and paediatric resuscitation training is implemented and utilised in actual practice

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion