Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
This journal utilises an Online Peer Review Service (OPRS) for submissions. By clicking "Continue" you will be taken to our partner site
https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pdm.
Please be aware that your Cambridge account is not valid for this OPRS and registration is required. We strongly advise you to read all "Author instructions" in the "Journal information" area prior to submitting.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To evaluate the effectiveness of the Actronics Interactive Learning System to teach the psychomotor skills of advanced airway management compared to the traditional method of lecture/demonstration.
Methods:
The study was a nonrandomized, nonequivalent comparison group design of a convenience sample of 86 American Heart Association (AHA), advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) students, who obtained instruction in airway management by the interactive videodisc (IVD) learning system (n = 41), or by the traditional method of demonstration/return demonstration (n = 45). The evaluation criteria for the students were based on the number of attempts required to perform successfully endotracheal (ET) intubation and esophageal obturator airway (EOA) insertion.
Results:
No statistically significant differences in the performance of ET insertion between the IVD and the traditional method of instruction could be demonstrated. However, initial certifiers for ACLS learning EOA insertion by the IVD method had a treatment effect (p = 0.004) compared to ACLS students learning by the traditional method. This treatment effect was not noted with ET intubation and EOA insertion for students seeking recertification. In a post-test satisfaction questionnaire, 34 IVD students reported satisfaction with learning airway management using this instructional method, but also expressed a preference to have an ACLS instructor available.
Conclusion:
This study highlights the role of IVD in teaching the complex skills of advanced airway management.
Previous evaluations of prehospital devices intended for spinal immobilization have focused on the device's ability to restrict motion only. This study defines six relevant criteria for evaluation of cervical immobilization device (CID) performance.
Objectives:
To suggest relevant criteria for evaluation and use available technology to improve measurements for performance testing of prehospital-care devices.
Methods:
Six parameters (motion restriction, access, ease of application, environmental performance, radiolucency, and storage size) were used to evaluate three types of CIDs: Device A—a single-use corrugated board; Device B—a reusable foam-block CID; and Device C—hospital towels and adhesive tape. To test motion restriction, the most frequently compared parameters for immobilization devices, 20 volunteers were asked to move their heads and necks through a series of motions (flexion, extension, lateral bending and rotation). Their movements were videotaped, still images of each movement were generated, and the degrees of deflection recorded from these still images. To ensure a consistent level of force, electromyography (EMG) of the sternodydomastoid and extensor muscles was employed.
Results:
Data were produced for each parameter and presented for comparison. The use of video to determine deflection proved to be a useful and highly accurate (±1°) method for measurement. The use of EMG technology enabled force to be controlled indirectly when the subjects used moderate levels of exertion. Overall, Devices A and C restricted motion better than Device B. Although Device C required the shortest time for application, it took the longest to prepare for application. The total time required for preparation and application of A and B essentially were equivalent, with A requiring no preparation time but taking the longest for application, and B having an intermediate interval for application. Device A allowed for the best examination of the head and neck. No differences were detected in performance in extreme environmental conditions or in radiolucency for cervical spine X-ray examinations. Device A consumed the smallest storage volume, B the greatest storage volume, and C an intermediate volume substantially greater than that required for A.
Conclusion:
Device evaluation should include examination of all relevant performance parameters using the most accurate and meaningful methods possible.
Although many authorities define a “mass gathering” as a group exceeding 1,000 persons, several times that number likely are to be present. The event for which the group will gather may be anything from a rock concert to an Olympic competition. Preparations for the event can be minor or major. This article reviews the issues that a physician should consider if he or she chooses to become involved in the delivery of medical care to such populations, as well as the evidence suggesting that a physician should be involved in most such gatherings.
Emergency medical care at public gatherings is haphazard at best and dangerous at worst.
There are surprisingly few data from which to plan the emergency medical needs for public events and no recognized standards or guidelines for providing emergency medical services at mass public gatherings.