Evaluating the fundamental critical care support course in critical care education in Japan: a survey of Japanese fundamental critical care support course experience

Kazuaki Atagi; Shinichi Nishi; Shigeki Fujitani; Takamitsu Kodama; Junya Ishikawa; Hideki Shimaoka

doi:10.1186/2052-0492-1-5

Evaluating the fundamental critical care support course in critical care education in Japan: a survey of Japanese fundamental critical care support course experience

J Intensive Care. 2013 Nov 1;1(1):5. doi: 10.1186/2052-0492-1-5. eCollection 2013.

Authors

Kazuaki Atagi¹, Shinichi Nishi², Shigeki Fujitani³, Takamitsu Kodama⁴, Junya Ishikawa⁵, Hideki Shimaoka¹

Affiliations

¹ Division of Critical Care Medicine, Osaka City General Hospital, 2-13-22, Miyakojima-Hondori, Miyakojima, Osaka, 534-0021 Japan.
² Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya Hyogo, Japan.
³ Tokyo Bay Urayasu/Ichikawa Medical Center, 3-4-32 Todaijima, Urayasu, Chiba, 279-0001 Japan.
⁴ Department of Surgery, Division of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390-9002 USA.
⁵ Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004 Japan.

Abstract

Background: The Fundamental Critical Care Support (FCCS) course has been introduced after minimal adaptation according to Japanese clinical settings. The original course in the USA is often used to prepare residents for rotations in the intensive care unit (ICU). Therefore, the FCCS program can be appropriate for the basic training of critical care in Japan to standardize critical care management. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether Japanese FCCS course is useful and has a possibility to deserve a basis of critical care management in Japan.

Methods: The course program was provided with the form of lecture and skills stations. Pre- and post-training knowledge was assessed. After completion of the 2-day course, a questionnaire survey was administered to all course participants. Participants were asked to fill out the questions regarding socio-demographic characteristics. Participants were also asked to identify which lectures or skill stations they thought to be useful for clinical practice. Then, they were asked to rate their performance of each field: 'Assessment,' 'Diagnosis,' 'Recognition,' 'Response,' and 'Transfer'.

Results: The number of participants increased year after year and reached 1,804 during the past 4 years. Nearly 70% of the participants were physicians. Most of the others were nurses. In the established year, the percentage of physicians who had clinical experience more than 5 years exceeded 50%, however, this percentage gradually decreased. On the contrary, the percentages of residents and nurses increased. Regarding useful sessions, nearly half of the participants thought that mechanical ventilation was the most useful. With regard to the results of pre- and post-tests, the participants had already shown a high average mark (78.8 ± 14.1) at the pre-test. Furthermore, the score at the post-test was significantly improved (82.0 ± 6.6, p < 0.01). The participants' confidence in any field regarding critical care management was almost 4 points (5-point scale).

Conclusions: It is considered that Japanese FCCS course is useful and has a promising basis of critical care management in Japan. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that Japanese FCCS mission has been successfully achieved.

Keywords: Education; Evaluation; Fundamental critical care support; Questionnaire; Simulator.