Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP · 2025
A Two-Year Evaluation of Student Performance in Responding to a Simulated Opioid-Induced Breathing Emergency Using Naloxone.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Franko Thomas, Dunleavy Erin A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pharmacist training on naloxone is often assessed within a few months following initial instruction; however, the retention of the skills necessary in a naloxone rescue beyond short-term follow-up and in the same cohort is not well documented. The aim of this study was to determine how students of the same class would perform on a simulated opioid-induced breathing emergency (OIBE) response with naloxone during their third professional (P3) year versus their first professional (P1) year.
METHODS: Pharmacy students in their P1 year were provided asynchronous training on naloxone information and use 2 days prior to a required skills lab. During class, students were provided hands-on experience with various naloxone devices, and then completed a simulation related to an encountered OIBE with naloxone response. These students completed the same simulation 2 years later during their P3 year having not received any additional training. A checklist from previously published work was used to evaluate student performance during each simulation. Results of the P1 and P3 simulations were compared.
RESULTS: Eighty-three percent (n = 55) of students had P1 and P3 data and were included in the analysis. The mean scores for students with matching data were 77% (standard deviation [SD] = 10.42) during the P1 year and 86% (SD = 11.47) during the P3 year (p < 0.001). Two checklist items showed significant improvement from the P1 to P3 years: determine if the patient is breathing (P1 = 20%, P3 = 76%; p < 0.001), and slightly tilt the patient's head (P1 = 20%, P3 = 41%; p = 0.01). One item showed a significant decrease from the P1 to P3 years: determine if the patient has a pulse (P1 = 96%, P3 = 70%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Students of the same class performed better during their P3 year than their P1 year on a simulated OIBE with naloxone.
METHODS: Pharmacy students in their P1 year were provided asynchronous training on naloxone information and use 2 days prior to a required skills lab. During class, students were provided hands-on experience with various naloxone devices, and then completed a simulation related to an encountered OIBE with naloxone response. These students completed the same simulation 2 years later during their P3 year having not received any additional training. A checklist from previously published work was used to evaluate student performance during each simulation. Results of the P1 and P3 simulations were compared.
RESULTS: Eighty-three percent (n = 55) of students had P1 and P3 data and were included in the analysis. The mean scores for students with matching data were 77% (standard deviation [SD] = 10.42) during the P1 year and 86% (SD = 11.47) during the P3 year (p < 0.001). Two checklist items showed significant improvement from the P1 to P3 years: determine if the patient is breathing (P1 = 20%, P3 = 76%; p < 0.001), and slightly tilt the patient's head (P1 = 20%, P3 = 41%; p = 0.01). One item showed a significant decrease from the P1 to P3 years: determine if the patient has a pulse (P1 = 96%, P3 = 70%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Students of the same class performed better during their P3 year than their P1 year on a simulated OIBE with naloxone.