• Marie-Hélène Lizotte, Véronique Latraverse, Ahmed Moussa, Christian Lachance, Keith Barrington, and Annie Janvier.
• Departments of Pediatrics, and.
• Pediatrics. 2015 Jul 1;136(1):e93-8.

BackgroundThe acceptability of simulated death has been debated by experts, but there is scarce information regarding trainees' perspective.MethodsTrainees in a large pediatric program were invited to perform mock codes, including pre and post questionnaires. Participants were exposed to 2 mock codes of neonates born pulseless. In the RESUSC scenario, the manikin responded to adequate resuscitation; in the DEATH scenario, the manikin remained pulseless. Mock codes were videotaped and evaluated by using the Neonatal Resuscitation Program score sheet. Debriefing was analyzed by using qualitative methodology.ResultsFifty-nine of 62 trainees answered the questionnaire, and 42 performed a total of 84 mock codes. All trainees found mock codes beneficial and would appreciate being exposed to more. Most found them realistic and 78% agreed with the following statement: "During mock codes the manikin improves when adequate resuscitation steps are provided." The scenario or order of scenario did not affect performance (RESUSC versus DEATH). Only 1 trainee stopped resuscitation after 10 minutes of asystole; 31% had not ceased resuscitation efforts by 20 minutes. During debriefing and post questionnaire, trainees found the DEATH scenario more stressful than RESUSC. Trainees all answered the following question during debriefing: "How did this go for you?" Two themes were identified in their answers: (1) the manikin does not die; and (2) death equals inadequate resuscitation.ConclusionsThe death of the manikin was stressful, but trainees thought this was acceptable and prepared them for their future. Trainees did not state that "death disclosures" were necessary before a simulated death.Copyright © 2015 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

15 keywords...

hide…