Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Paris Hotel and Casino Las Vegas, Nevada Mock Codes Lead to real Results Presented by: Bridgid G. Joseph BSN, MSN, CCNS Presenter Disclosure Information Bridgid G. Joseph Mock Codes Lead to Real Results FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No relevant financial relationship (s) exist If you don’t use it, you lose it • Previous mock codes on units lasted over an hour • Simulation Center: 3 hour mock code team training monthly • Fewer actual Code Blue events within our hospital Background • Created a New Formalized Mock Code Program: • • • • • • 1 mock code on each unit monthly All unannounced to floor staff Covered all shifts Mock codes consist of a training and debrief Last a total of 10 minutes Focused educational exercise Intervention • Start with an unresponsive patient • Training Code cart available at site • Fully stocked mimicking our code carts • Training medications/bristojets used. • Patients in a shockable rhythm • VFib, pulseless VTach Mock Code Details • • • • • • • Recognition of Arrest Position of bed and patient CPR AED Code Cart Emergency Medications Debrief Mock Code Details • Able to assess other hospital-wide initiatives during the response to these exercises: • Alarm Fatigue: Staff response to low level telemetry alarms (leads off alarms) • Hand hygiene: ensure all secondary responders used cal STAT, gloves, appropriate PPE • Teach code cart/code team policy changes during debrief • Team training: working together and communicating Expansion of Focus 2011 Results 3:40 2:35 0:40 Results 2011 Time to CPR (minutes) Time to Defibrillation 0:00 Time to Epinephrine Time to 1st Responder 2011 Results 100.0% 85.7% 61.9% 59.5% 50.0% 50.0% 47.6% 14.3% 16.7% 2012 Results 4:00 Adjusted for time to first responder 2:45 0:50 Time to CPR (minutes) 0:50 Time to Defibrillation Time to Epinephrine Time to 1st Responder 2012 Results 94.2% 74.3% 65.7% 59.4% 42.3% 20.0% 24.2% 11.4% 11.4% 2013 Results 4:30 Adjusted for time to first responder 3:10 1:50 1:35 Time to CPR (minutes) Time to Defibrillation Time to Epinephrine Time to 1st Responder 2013 Results 100.0% 83.9% 74.0% 61.8% 45.5% 30.3% 32.1% 32.1% 18.1% 2014 Results 4:10 Adjusted for time to first responder 2:35 1:10 0:47 Time to CPR (minutes) Time to Defibrillation Time to Epinephrine Time to 1st Responder 2014 Results 96.2% 93.3% 67.9% 50.0% 53.6% 19.0% 41.4% 41.4% 27.6% • • • • • • Time Staff buy-in Increased Census Alarm Fatigue Staff recognition Off Shifts Pitfalls 4:19 3:50 3:21 2:52 2:24 2011 Results 2012 Results 1:55 2013 Results 1:26 0:57 0:28 0:00 Time to CPR (minutes) Time to Defibrillation Time to Epinephrine Time to 1st Responder Overall a successful program: • Improvements: • Significant improvement in overall code cart knowledge, use of AEDs, and medication location and use. • Staff starting CPR immediately, able to defibrillate quickly, and have epinephrine ready and administered quickly. • Anecdotally: • • • • Staff report feeling more confident Working better as teams Asking for mock codes Sneers have turned to cheers!! Conclusion