Critical indicators associated with negative performance in a selectively manned unit

Introduction. Selectively manned units have a long, international history, both military and civilian. Some examples include SWAT teams, firefighters, the FBI, the DEA, the CIA, and military Special Operations. These special duty operators are individuals who perform a highly skilled and dangerous job in a unique environment. A significant amount of money is spent by the Department of Defense (DoD) and other federal agencies to recruit, select, train, equip and support these operators. When a critical incident or significant life event occurs, that jeopardizes an operator's performance; there can be heavy losses in terms of training, time, money, and potentially, lives. In order to limit the number of critical incidents, selection processes have been developed over time to “select out” those individuals most likely to perform below desired performance standards under pressure or stress and to "select in" those with the "right stuff". This study is part of a larger program evaluation to assess markers that identify whether a person will fail under the stresses in a selectively manned unit. The primary question of the study is whether there are indicators in the selection process that signify potential negative performance at a later date. ^ Methods. The population being studied included applicants to a selectively manned DoD organization between 1993 and 2001 as part of a unit assessment and selection process (A&S). Approximately 1900 A&S records were included in the analysis. Over this nine year period, seventy-two individuals were determined to have had a critical incident. A critical incident can come in the form of problems with the law, personal, behavioral or family problems, integrity issues, and skills deficit. Of the seventy-two individuals, fifty-four of these had full assessment data and subsequent supervisor performance ratings which assessed how an individual performed while on the job. This group was compared across a variety of variables including demographics and psychometric testing with a group of 178 individuals who did not have a critical incident and had been determined to be good performers with positive ratings by their supervisors.^ Results. In approximately 2004, an online pre-screen survey was developed in the hopes of preselecting out those individuals with items that would potentially make them ineligible for selection to this organization. This survey has aided the organization to increase its selection rates and save resources in the process. (Patterson, Howard Smith, & Fisher, Unit Assessment and Selection Project, 2008) When the same prescreen was used on the critical incident individuals, it was found that over 60% of the individuals would have been flagged as unacceptable. This would have saved the organization valuable resources and heartache.^ There were some subtle demographic differences between the two groups (i.e. those with critical incidents were almost twice as likely to be divorced compared with the positive performers). Upon comparison of Psychometric testing several items were noted to be different. The two groups were similar when their IQ levels were compared using the Multidimensional Aptitude Battery (MAB). When looking at the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), there appeared to be a difference on the MMPI Social Introversion; the Critical Incidence group scored somewhat higher. When analysis was done, the number of MMPI Critical Items between the two groups was similar as well. When scores on the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO) were compared, the critical incident individuals tended to score higher on Openness and on its subscales (Ideas, Actions, and Feelings). There was a positive correlation between Total Neuroticism T Score and number of MMPI critical items.^ Conclusions. This study shows that the current pre-screening process is working and would have saved the organization significant resources. ^ If one was to develop a profile of a candidate who potentially could suffer a critical incident and subsequently jeopardize the unit, mission and the safety of the public they would look like the following: either divorced or never married, score high on the MMPI in Social Introversion, score low on MMPI with an "excessive" amount of MMPI critical items; and finally scores high on the NEO Openness and subscales Ideas, Feelings, and Actions.^ Based on the results gleaned from the analysis in this study there seems to be several factors, within psychometric testing, that when taken together, will aid the evaluators in selecting only the highest quality operators in order to save resources and to help protect the public from unfortunate critical incidents which may adversely affect our health and safety.^

Intensive care unit utilization among patients with cancer at the end of life

Over the last 2 decades, survival rates in critically ill cancer patients have improved. Despite the increase in survival, the intensive care unit (ICU) continues to be a location where end-of-life care takes place. More than 20% of deaths in the United States occur after admission to an ICU, and as baby boomers reach the seventh and eighth decades of their lives, the volume of patients in the ICU is predicted to rise. The aim of this study was to evaluate intensive care unit utilization among patients with cancer who were at the end of life. End of life was defined using decedent and high-risk cohort study designs. The decedent study evaluated characteristics and ICU utilization during the terminal hospital stay among patients who died at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center during 2003-2007. The high-risk cohort study evaluated characteristics and ICU utilization during the index hospital stay among patients admitted to MD Anderson during 2003-2007 with a high risk of in-hospital mortality. Factors associated with higher ICU utilization in the decedent study included non-local residence, hematologic and non-metastatic solid tumor malignancies, malignancy diagnosed within 2 months, and elective admission to surgical or pediatric services. Having a palliative care consultation on admission was associated with dying in the hospital without ICU services. In the cohort of patients with high risk of in-hospital mortality, patients who went to the ICU were more likely to be younger, male, with newly diagnosed non-metastatic solid tumor or hematologic malignancy, and admitted from the emergency center to one of the surgical services. A palliative care consultation on admission was associated with a decreased likelihood of having an ICU stay. There were no differences in ethnicity, marital status, comorbidities, or insurance status between patients who did and did not utilize ICU services. Inpatient mortality probability models developed for the general population are inadequate in predicting in-hospital mortality for patients with cancer. The following characteristics that differed between the decedent study and high-risk cohort study can be considered in future research to predict risk of in-hospital mortality for patients with cancer: ethnicity, type and stage of malignancy, time since diagnosis, and having advance directives. Identifying those at risk can precipitate discussions in advance to ensure care remains appropriate and in accordance with the wishes of the patient and family.^