Debriefing after resuscitations in a pediatric emergency department

Multiple guidelines recommend debriefing of actual resuscitations to improve clinical performance. We implemented a novel standardized debriefing program using a Debriefing In Situ Conversation after Emergent Resuscitations Now (DISCERN) tool. Following the development of the evidence-based DISCERN tool, we conducted an observational study of all resuscitations (intubation, CPR, and/or defibrillation) at a pediatric emergency department (ED) over one year. Resuscitation interventions, patient survival, and physician team leader characteristics were analyzed as predictors for debriefing. Each debriefing's participants, time duration, and content were recorded. Thematic content of debriefings was categorized by framework approach into Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) elements. There were 241 resuscitations and 63 (26%) debriefings. A higher proportion of debriefings occurred after CPR (p<0.001) or ED death (p<0.001). Debriefing participants always included an attending and nurse; the median number of staff roles present was six. Median interval (from resuscitation end to start of debriefing) & debriefing durations were 33 (IQR 15,67) and 10 minutes (IQR 5,12), respectively. Common TEAM themes included co-operation/coordination (30%), communication (22%), and situational awareness (15%). Stated reasons for not debriefing included: unnecessary (78%), time constraints (19%), or other reasons (3%). Debriefings with the DISCERN tool usually involved higher acuity resuscitations, involved most of the indicated personnel, and lasted less than 10 minutes. This qualitative tool could be adapted to other settings. Future studies are needed to evaluate for potential impacts on education, quality improvement programming, and staff emotional well-being.^

Client Home or Agency Office? How Do We Decide Where to See Our Clients?

Decisions about location of services sometimes appear to be made more on the basis of agency preference than assessment of need. Today the profession has enough experience with service locations that it is possible to develop more clear guidelines for the decision about where work with clients should take place, in the client’s home or nearby community or in the practitioner’s office. This study was conducted with two purposes; 1) to identify at a higher level of evidence the various reasons for seeing clients in their own homes and nearby community setting; and 2) to demonstrate how readily available information can be used to gradually increase the level of evidence by which practice decisions are made.