International Journal of Healthcare Simulation

Background:

Anaphylaxis is an important emergency which forms part of the adult Advanced Life Support guidelines. The guidelines for anaphylaxis have recently undergone a change in the 2021 revision, with steroids and antihistamine no longer advised for acute anaphylaxis and an adrenaline infusion included as part of the new refractory anaphylaxis algorithm [1]. Scenarios for the medical trainees run at our simulation centre identified a lack of awareness of the revised anaphylaxis guidelines among learners. A QIP was completed to improve the level of learners’ awareness and confidence of the revised anaphylaxis guidelines in conjunction with the simulation team.

Methods:

Online surveys were sent out to the medical registrars and internal medicine trainees regarding the revised anaphylaxis guidelines. This was followed by an email sent two weeks later with the revised guidelines highlighting key changes. The same group were subsequently re-surveyed two weeks following the intervention to identify changes in clinical practice. Concurrently, scenarios based on the revised anaphylaxis guidelines were run for the medical trainees with specific emphasis on whether trainees were aware of the need for an adrenaline infusion (managed in a specialist setting) if symptoms were ongoing despite two IM doses of adrenaline. In the post-simulation debriefing, discussion was focused on the change in the anaphylaxis guidelines.

Results:

In the first cycle, 100% of 23 respondents felt confident managing anaphylaxis but only 50% of respondents were aware (and were confident) that the guidelines had been revised. 2/3 of respondents had not managed a case of anaphylaxis in the last 12 months. In the second cycle, 100% of 4 respondents were aware of the revised guidelines but only 75% of respondents were confident in following the guidelines. 75% of respondents had not managed a case of anaphylaxis in the last 12 months. The significant drop in number of responders is likely to be multifactorial but may reflect a change in focus of educational needs due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic leading to a change in the educational landscape. A survey done on the attitude of medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic towards online learning found that only 54.1% of respondents felt that interactive discussion could occur through e-learning [2].

Conclusion:

Following the QI results, the cardiac arrest trolleys were checked and the emergency box with adrenaline now includes the revised anaphylaxis algorithm but not hydrocortisone and chlorphenamine. Refractory anaphylaxis is now a standard scenario for the medical trainees in our simulation centre.

References

1. Resuscitation Council UK. Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis: Guidelines for healthcare providers. 2021. https://www.resus.org.uk/sites/default/files/2021-05/Emergency%20Treatment%20of%20Anaphylaxis%20May%202021_0.pdf [Accessed on 1/06/2022]

2. Alsoufi A, Alsuyihili A, Msherghi A, Elhadi A, Atiyah H, Ashini A, Ashwieb A, Ghula M, Ben Hasan H, Abudabuos S, Alameen H, Abokhdhir T, Anaiba M, Nagib T, Shuwayyah A, Benothman R, Arrefae G, Alkhwayildi A, Alhadi A, Zaid A, Elhadi M. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical education: Medical students’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding electronic learning. PLoS One. 2020;15(11):e0242905.