You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 8, Issue 10
  • Proficiency-based progression training: an ‘end to end’ model for decreasing error applied to achievement of effective epidural analgesia during labour: a randomised control study

Responses

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Anaesthesia
Research
Proficiency-based progression training: an ‘end to end’ model for decreasing error applied to achievement of effective epidural analgesia during labour: a randomised control study
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 31 July 2019
    Individual trainee failure rate

    Dear Brandon Togioka,
    Thanks for the interest in the article.
    We actually had similar question ourselves as the numbers were small. The following are the individual trainee failure rates in percentage.

    Trainee number Failure Rate (percentage) Group 1= group S, 2= Group P

    1. 20 1
    2. 10 1
    3. 0 1
    4. 30 1
    5. 10 1
    6. 30 1
    7. 40 1
    8. 30 1
    9. 10 2
    10. 0 2
    11. 0 2...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on: 26 July 2019
    Request for more granular data
    • Brandon Togioka, Associate Professor in Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine; Director of Clinical Research; Director OB Anesthesia Oregon Health and Science University

    I commend the authors for developing and validating this proficiency-based progression training. Epidural failures have a significant impact on patient satisfaction and at times patient safety on labor and delivery. The reduction in epidural failure realized through this program is impressive. I wonder if the authors could provide information on each trainees epidural failure rate. There is significant variance in the number of epidural placements that it takes for a trainee to achieve competence. I worry that one or two trainees in the simulation-only group with very high rates of epidural failure may have biased the results significantly. Seeing the epidural failure rates for each individual trainee would address this concern.

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.