Simulation in training: one-year experience using an efficiency index to assess interventional radiology fellow training status

PURPOSE: To compare objective fellow and expert efficiency indices for an interventional radiology renal artery stenosis skill set with the use of a high-fidelity simulator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Mentice VIST simulator was used for three different renal artery stenosis simulations of varying difficulty, which were used to grade performance. Fellows' indices at three intervals throughout 1 year were compared to expert baseline performance. Seventy-four simulated procedures were performed, 63 of which were captured as audiovisual recordings. Three levels of fellow experience were analyzed: 1, 6, and 12 months of dedicated interventional radiology fellowship. The recordings were compiled on a computer workstation and analyzed. Distinct measurable events in the procedures were identified with task analysis, and data regarding efficiency were extracted. Total scores were calculated as the product of procedure time, fluoroscopy time, tools, and contrast agent volume. The lowest scores, which reflected efficient use of tools, radiation, and time, were considered to indicate proficiency. Subjective analysis of participants' procedural errors was not included in this analysis. RESULTS: Fellows' mean scores diminished from 1 month to 12 months (42,960 at 1 month, 18,726 at 6 months, and 9,636 at 12 months). The experts' mean score was 4,660. In addition, the range of variance in score diminished with increasing experience (from a range of 5,940-120,156 at 1 month to 2,436-85,272 at 6 months and 2,160-32,400 at 12 months). Expert scores ranged from 1,450 to 10,800. CONCLUSIONS: Objective efficiency indices for simulated procedures can demonstrate scores directly comparable to the level of clinical experience.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes

Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to verify an autophagic response.

The James Lind Library: explaining and illustrating the evolution of fair tests of medical treatments

The James Lind Library (www.jameslindlibrary.org) has been established to improve public and professional general knowledge about fair tests of treatments in healthcare and their history. Its foundation was laid ten years ago at the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, and its administrative centre is in the College's Sibbald Library, one of the most important collections of historic medical manuscripts, papers and books in the world. The James Lind Library is a website that introduces visitors to the principles of fair tests of treatments, with a series of short, illustrated essays, which are currently available in English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish. A 100-page book-- Testing Treatments--is now available free through the website, both in English and in Arabic and Spanish translations. To illustrate the evolution of ideas related to fair tests of treatments from 2000 BC to the present, the James Lind Library contains key passages and images from manuscripts, books and journal articles, many of them accompanied by commentaries, biographies, portraits and other relevant documents and images, including audio and video files. New material is being added to the website continuously, as relevant new records are identified and as methods for testing treatments evolve. A multinational, multilingual editorial team oversees the development of the website, which currently receives tens of thousands of visitors every month.

Book Review of “Human Behaviour and the Social Environment: Models, Metaphors, and Maps for Applying Theoretical Perspectives to Practice”. 640 pages, Thomson Brooks/Cole, 2007, by James A. Forte

This voluminous book which draws on almost 1000 references provides an important theoretical base for practice. After an informative introduction about models, maps and metaphors, Forte provides an impressive presentation of several perspectives for use in practice; applied ecological theory, applied system theory, applied biology, applied cognitive science, applied psychodynamic theory, applied behaviourism, applied symbolic interactionism, applied social role theory, applied economic theory, and applied critical theory. Finally he completes his book with a chapter on “Multi theory practice and routes to integration.”

Towards a Hybrid Method to Categorize Interruptions and Activities in Healthcare

Objective Interruptions are known to have a negative impact on activity performance. Understanding how an interruption contributes to human error is limited because there is not a standard method for analyzing and classifying interruptions. Qualitative data are typically analyzed by either a deductive or an inductive method. Both methods have limitations. In this paper a hybrid method was developed that integrates deductive and inductive methods for the categorization of activities and interruptions recorded during an ethnographic study of physicians and registered nurses in a Level One Trauma Center. Understanding the effects of interruptions is important for designing and evaluating informatics tools in particular and for improving healthcare quality and patient safety in general. Method The hybrid method was developed using a deductive a priori classification framework with the provision of adding new categories discovered inductively in the data. The inductive process utilized line-by-line coding and constant comparison as stated in Grounded Theory. Results The categories of activities and interruptions were organized into a three-tiered hierarchy of activity. Validity and reliability of the categories were tested by categorizing a medical error case external to the study. No new categories of interruptions were identified during analysis of the medical error case. Conclusions Findings from this study provide evidence that the hybrid model of categorization is more complete than either a deductive or an inductive method alone. The hybrid method developed in this study provides the methodical support for understanding, analyzing, and managing interruptions and workflow.

Towards a hybrid method to categorize interruptions and activities in healthcare.

OBJECTIVE: Interruptions are known to have a negative impact on activity performance. Understanding how an interruption contributes to human error is limited because there is not a standard method for analyzing and classifying interruptions. Qualitative data are typically analyzed by either a deductive or an inductive method. Both methods have limitations. In this paper, a hybrid method was developed that integrates deductive and inductive methods for the categorization of activities and interruptions recorded during an ethnographic study of physicians and registered nurses in a Level One Trauma Center. Understanding the effects of interruptions is important for designing and evaluating informatics tools in particular as well as improving healthcare quality and patient safety in general. METHOD: The hybrid method was developed using a deductive a priori classification framework with the provision of adding new categories discovered inductively in the data. The inductive process utilized line-by-line coding and constant comparison as stated in Grounded Theory. RESULTS: The categories of activities and interruptions were organized into a three-tiered hierarchy of activity. Validity and reliability of the categories were tested by categorizing a medical error case external to the study. No new categories of interruptions were identified during analysis of the medical error case. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study provide evidence that the hybrid model of categorization is more complete than either a deductive or an inductive method alone. The hybrid method developed in this study provides the methodical support for understanding, analyzing, and managing interruptions and workflow.

Craig Brook; two fishermen bringing in their nets

Archival Collection