My main focus, for research and for implementations, is on understanding, adapting, and scaling concepts that enable both providers and patients to thrive. Combining my backgrounds in implementation science, quality improvement, human factors, simulation, and patient safety, our teams often utiliize various tools from medical simulation that can translate to clinical changes. Multi-year examples of our teams' implementations and research in this space include: 1. clinical uses of emergency manuals (context relevant sets of cognitive aids or checklists), for crisis management of critical events 2. surgical caps with names and roles to enable both teamwork for better patient care and connection for provider and patient wellness. 3. Psychological safety and safety culture. We enjoy collaborating with multiple colleagues throughout healthcare and other safety-critical industries for bigger impacts.

For background and free resources for implementing emergency manuals see from Stanford Anesthesia Cognitive Aid Group and from the broader Emergency Manuals Implementation Collaborative

Clinical Focus

  • Anesthesia

Academic Appointments

Professional Education

  • Board Certification: American Board of Anesthesiology, Anesthesia (2009)
  • Residency: Massachusetts General Hospital (2007) MA
  • Internship: Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School (2004) MA
  • Medical Education: Harvard Medical School (2003) MA
  • Fellowship, Center for Medical Simulation, Harvard, Simulation (2007)

Current Research and Scholarly Interests

Implementation of emergency manuals (context relevant sets of cognitive aids or crisis checklists), surgical caps with names and roles, and other evidence-based patient safety advances can help excellent clinicians to deliver optimal care, if designed and implemented effectively.

My and teams' interests include:
1. Implementation of emergency manuals for crisis management of critical events, in both simulation-based and clinical settings
For free resources, see:, a website I developed to share the work of our Stanford Anesthesia Cognitive Aid Group and our interdisciplinary clinical implementation team. And, Emergency Manuals Implementation Collaborative, which a group of us founded to freely share tools and implementation resources nationally and globally.
2. Enabling communication and safety culture, including via systematic implementation of surgical caps with names and roles, and studying their impacts.
3. Applying mixed-methods of implementation science to research #1 and #2.
4. Utilizing high fidelity simulation along with debriefing to teach principles of Crisis Resource Management (CRM). Faculty for multiple courses and Co-Director of Stanford's Evolve simulation program.
5. Combining verbal 'What If's' with low-tech screen-based simulation to harness the power of simulation and debriefing in much wider, more frequent, and even clinical settings.
6. Difficult airway management, and ENT anesthesia, integrating procedural and full-scenario simulation to practice and debrief approaches to challenging cases.

2023-24 Courses

All Publications

  • Perceptions of Use of Names, Recognition of Roles, and Teamwork After Labeling Surgical Caps. JAMA network open Wong, B. J., Nassar, A. K., Earley, M., Chen, L., Roman-Micek, T., Wald, S. H., Shanafelt, T. D., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N. 2023; 6 (11): e2341182


    Communication failures in perioperative areas are common and have negative outcomes for both patients and clinicians. Names and roles of teammates are difficult to remember or discern contributing to suboptimal communication, yet the utility of labeled surgical caps with names and roles for enhancing perceived teamwork and connection is not well studied.To evaluate the use of labeled surgical caps in name use and role recognition, as well as teamwork and connection, among interprofessional perioperative teammates.In this quality improvement study, caps labeled with names and roles were distributed to 967 interprofessional perioperative clinicians, along with preimplementation and 6-month postimplementation surveys. Conducted between July 8, 2021, and June 25, 2022, at a single large, academic, quaternary health care center in the US, the study comprised surgeons, anesthesiologists, trainees, and all interprofessional hospital staff who work in adult general surgery perioperative areas.Labeled surgical caps were offered cost-free, although not mandatory, to each interested clinician.Quantitative survey of self-reported frequency for name use and role recognition as well as postimplementation sense of teamwork and connection. The surveys also elicited free response comments.Of the 1483 eligible perioperative clinicians, 967 (65%; 387 physicians and 580 nonphysician staff; 58% female) completed preimplementation surveys and received labeled caps, and 243 of these individuals (51% of physicians and 8% of staff) completed postimplementation surveys. Pre-post results were limited to physicians, due to the low postsurvey staff response rate. The odds of participants reporting that they were often called by their name increased after receiving a labeled cap (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 13.37; 95% CI, 8.18-21.86). On postsurveys, participants reported that caps with names and roles substantially improved teamwork (80%) and connection (79%) with teammates. Participants who reported an increased frequency of being called by their name had higher odds for reporting improved teamwork (AOR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.91-6.26) and connection with teammates (AOR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.76-5.84). Free response comments supported the quantitative data that labeled caps facilitated knowing teammates' names and roles and fostered a climate of wellness, teamwork, inclusion, and patient safety.The findings of this quality improvement study performed with interprofessional teammates suggest that organizationally sponsored labeled surgical caps was associated with improved teamwork, indicated by increased name use and role recognition in perioperative areas.

    View details for DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.41182

    View details for PubMedID 37976068

  • Leveraging What Goes Right to Improve Perioperative Safety. JAMA network open Nassar, A. K., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N. 2023; 6 (4): e237629

    View details for DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.7629

    View details for PubMedID 37040118

  • Emergency manual peri-crisis use six years following implementation: Sustainment of an intervention for rare crises. Journal of clinical anesthesia Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Frackman, A., Agarwala, A. V., Doney, A., Pian-Smith, M. C. 2023; 87: 111111


    STUDY OBJECTIVE: Use of cognitive aids during emergencies increases key actions and decreases omissions, both known to save lives. With little known about emergency manual (EM) clinical use, we aimed to help answer "Will EMs be used peri-crisis at a meaningful frequency?" and to explore clinical sustainment.DESIGN: Prospective, observational study.SETTING: Operating Rooms.PATIENTS: All patients undergoing anesthesia at a major academic medical center during the study periods; 75,000 cases.INTERVENTION & MEASUREMENTS: To understand the initial and sustainment phases of EM implementation, we placed a question regarding EM use at the end of every anesthetic case to prospectively measure EM use at: implementation, one-year later, and six years post-implementation.MAIN RESULTS: For more than twenty-four thousand cases in each approximately 6-month study period, EMs were used peri-crisis (before, during or after a perioperative crisis) in 145 cases initially (0.55%; SE 0.045%), 42 cases one-year later (0.17%; SE 0.026%), and 57 cases (0.21%; SE 0.028%) six years post-implementation. Peri-crisis EM uses dropped 0.38% (97.5% CI: 0.26%, 0.49%) from initial to one-year post-implementation. After that, peri-crisis EM uses did not differ significantly from one-year to six years post-implementation, showing sustainment [increased 0.04% (97.5% CI: -0.05%, 0.12%)]. Among cases with cardiac arrest or CPR, as a subset proxy for relevant crises, EMs were used in 7/13 such cases initially (54%, SE 13.6%), 8/20 one-year later (40%; SE 10.9%) and 7/13 six years later (54%; SE 13.6%).CONCLUSIONS: After an initial expected drop, EM peri-crisis use six years post-implementation was: sustained without intensive additional efforts, averaged 10 times per month at a single institution, and was reported in more than half of cases with cardiac arrest or CPR. Peri-crisis use of EMs is appropriately rare, though for relevant crises can have substantial positive impacts as described in prior literature. The sustained use of EMs may be related to increasing cultural acceptance of EMs, as reflected in survey result trends and broader cognitive aid literature.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111111

    View details for PubMedID 37003046

  • Personalized Scrub Caps for Improved Communication and Professional Wellness Speirs, K., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2022: 930-934
  • Labeled Surgical Caps: A Tool to Improve Perioperative Communication. Anesthesiology Wong, B. J., Nassar, A. K., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N. 2022

    View details for DOI 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004192

    View details for PubMedID 35348599

  • What's in a Name? Enhancing Communication in the Operating Room with the Use of Names and Roles on Surgical Caps. Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety Brodzinsky, L. n., Crowe, S. n., Lee, H. C., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Sie, L. n., Padua, K. L., Daniels, K. n. 2021; 47 (4): 258–64


    A pilot study was conducted in a tertiary referral center to assess whether wearing caps labeled with providers' names and roles has an impact on communication in the operating room (OR).Two obstetricians observed surgeries for name uses and missed communications. Following each case, all providers were given a short survey that queried their attitude about the use of labeled surgical caps, their ability to know the names and roles of other providers during a case, and the impact of scrub attire on identifying others. They were also asked to rate the ease of communication and their ability to recall name and roles of the personnel specific to the case. Patients were asked how they perceived the use of labeled caps by providers.Twenty scheduled cesarean deliveries were randomized to either labeled (10) or nonlabeled (10) surgical caps. A total of 129 providers participated in the study, with 117 providing responses to the survey. Providers reported knowing the names and roles of colleagues more often with labeled caps vs. nonlabeled caps (names: 77.8% vs. 55.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 64.4%-88.0% vs. 41.6%-67.9%, p = 0.011; roles: 92.5% vs. 78.3%, 95% CI = 81.8%-98.0% vs. 65.8%-88.0%, p = 0.036). Name uses increased (43 vs. 34, p = 0.208), and missed communications decreased (16 vs. 20, p = 0.614) when labeled caps were worn. Providers and patients had an overwhelmingly positive response to labeled caps.This pilot study demonstrated that wearing labeled caps in the OR led to more frequent name uses and less frequent missed communications. Providers and patients embraced the concept of labeled caps and perceived wearing labeled caps as improving communication in the OR.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jcjq.2020.11.012

    View details for PubMedID 33384215

  • Clinical Uses and Impacts of Emergency Manuals During Perioperative Crises. Anesthesia and analgesia Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Bereknyei Merrell, S., Agarwala, A. V., De La Cruz, M. M., Cooper, J. B., Howard, S. K., Asch, S. M., Gaba, D. M. 2020; 131 (6): 1815–26


    BACKGROUND: Performing key actions efficiently during crises can determine clinical outcomes, yet even expert clinicians omit key actions. Simulation-based studies of crises show that correct performance of key actions dramatically increases when emergency manuals (EMs) are used. Despite widespread dissemination of EMs, there is a need to understand in clinical contexts, when, how, and how often EMs are used and not used, along with perceived impacts.METHODS: We conducted interviews with the anesthesia professionals involved in perioperative crises, identified with criterion-based sampling, occurring between October 2014 and May 2016 at 2 large academic medical centers with a history of EM training and implementation. Our convergent, mixed-methods study of the interview data extracted quantitative counts and qualitative themes of EM use and nonuse during clinical crises.RESULTS: Interviews with 53 anesthesia professionals yielded 80 descriptions of applicable clinical crises, with varying durations and event types. Of 69 unique patients whose cases involved crises, the EM was used during 37 (54%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 41-66). Impacts on clinician team members included decreased stress for individual anesthesia professionals (95%), enabled teamwork (73%), and calmed atmosphere (46%). Impacts on delivery of patient care included specific action improvements, including catching errors of omission, for example, turning off anesthetic during cardiac arrest, only after EM use (59%); process improvements, for example, double-checking all actions were completed (41%); and impediments (0%). In 8% of crises, EM use was associated with potential distractions, although none were perceived to harm delivery of patient care. For 32 EM nonuses (46%; 95% CI, 34-59), participants self-identified errors of omission or delays in key actions (56%), all key actions performed (13%), and crisis too brief for EM to be used (31%).CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that EMs in operating rooms are being used during many applicable crises and that clinicians perceive EM use to add value. The reported negative effects were minimal and potentially offset by positive effects.

    View details for DOI 10.1213/ANE.0000000000005012

    View details for PubMedID 33197160

  • Ten years of the Helsinki Declaration on patient safety in anaesthesiology: An expert opinion on peri-operative safety aspects. European journal of anaesthesiology Preckel, B., Staender, S., Arnal, D., Brattebo, G., Feldman, J. M., Ffrench-O'Carroll, R., Fuchs-Buder, T., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Haller, G., Haugen, A. S., Hendrickx, J. F., Kalkman, C. J., Meybohm, P., Neuhaus, C., Ostergaard, D., Plunkett, A., Schuler, H. U., Smith, A. F., Struys, M. M., Subbe, C. P., Wacker, J., Welch, J., Whitaker, D. K., Zacharowski, K., Mellin-Olsen, J. 2020


    : Patient safety is an activity to mitigate preventable patient harm that may occur during the delivery of medical care. The European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA)/European Union of Medical Specialists had previously published safety recommendations on minimal monitoring and postanaesthesia care, but with the growing public and professional interest it was decided to produce a much more encompassing document. The EBA and the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) published a consensus on what needs to be done/achieved for improvement of peri-operative patient safety. During the Euroanaesthesia meeting in Helsinki/Finland in 2010, this vision was presented to anaesthesiologists, patients, industry and others involved in health care as the 'Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology'. In May/June 2020, ESA and EBA are celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology; a good opportunity to look back and forward evaluating what was achieved in the recent 10 years, and what needs to be done in the upcoming years. The Patient Safety and Quality Committee (PSQC) of ESA invited experts in their fields to contribute, and these experts addressed their topic in different ways; there are classical, narrative reviews, more systematic reviews, political statements, personal opinions and also original data presentation. With this publication we hope to further stimulate implementation of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology, as well as initiating relevant research in the future.

    View details for DOI 10.1097/EJA.0000000000001244

    View details for PubMedID 32487963

  • Low-flow Nasal Cannula and Potential Nosocomial Spread of COVID-19. British journal of anaesthesia Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Greene, J. A., Garibaldi, B. T. 2020

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.bja.2020.05.011

    View details for PubMedID 32425208

  • Operating Room In Situ Interprofessional Simulation for Improving Communication and Teamwork. The Journal of surgical research Shi, R. n., Marin-Nevarez, P. n., Hasty, B. n., Roman-Micek, T. n., Hirx, S. n., Anderson, T. n., Schmiederer, I. n., Fanning, R. n., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. n., Austin, N. n., Lau, J. N. 2020; 260: 237–44


    Effective teamwork and communication are correlated with improved patient care quality and outcomes. The belief that each team member contributes to excellent patient care in the operating room (OR) leads to a more productive work environment. However, poor teamwork and communication lead to poorer OR outcomes. We qualitatively and quantitatively explored perspectives of three OR professions (nursing, anesthesiology, and surgery) on teamwork and communication in the OR preinterprofessional and postinterprofessional in situ OR simulation.One-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted; 14 pre-in situ simulations during July-October 2017 (three surgery, four anesthesiology, and six nursing staff), and 10 post-in situ simulations during August-November 2017 (five surgery, four anesthesiology, and one nursing staff). Themes were identified inductively to create a codebook. The codebook was used to consensus code all interviews. This analysis informed the development of a quantitative survey distributed to all contactable interviewees (22).Presimulation and postsimulation interview participants concurred on teamwork and communication importance, believed communication to be key to effective teamwork, and identified barriers to communication: lack of cordiality, lack of engagement from other staff, distractions, role hierarchies, and lack of familiarity with other staff. The large majority of survey participants-all having participated in simulations-believed they could use effective communication in their workplace.Establishing methods for improving and maintaining the ability of OR professionals to communicate with each other is imperative for patient safety. Effective team communication leads to safe and successful outcomes, as well as a productive and supportive OR work environment.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2020.11.051

    View details for PubMedID 33360307

  • Bringing Perioperative Emergency Manuals to Your Institution: A "How To" from Concept to Implementation in 10 Steps JOINT COMMISSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY AND PATIENT SAFETY Agarwala, A., McRichards, L., Rao, V., Kurzweil, V., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N. 2019; 45 (3): 170–79


    Emergency manuals (EMs) are context-relevant sets of crisis checklists or cognitive aids designed to enable professional teams to deliver optimal care during critical events. Evidence from simulation and other high-risk industries have proven that use of these types of checklists can significantly improve event management and decrease omissions of key steps. However, simply printing and placing tools in operating rooms (ORs) is unlikely to be effective. How interventions are implemented influences whether clinicians actually change practice and whether patient care is affected. This article provides an in-depth description of a rigorous implementation plan with three goals: (1) place EMs in every anesthetizing location, (2) create interprofessional engagement, and (3) demonstrate that a majority of anesthesia clinicians would use the new tool in some way within the first year.The implementation of EMs included 10 steps across four distinct phases. EM use was measured using an electronic quality assurance tool, with data collected after each case about whether and how the EM was used.During the six months following implementation, 67.0% of clinicians had used the manual, with 24.1% using it for clinical care and 9.2% using it during a critical event.This article presents a framework and detailed description of the steps a large academic institution followed in successfully implementing EMs. In conjunction with other available resources, those interested in introducing OR EMs at large, complex institutions may benefit from the experience shared in anticipating challenges and overcoming barriers to adoption.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.08.012

    View details for Web of Science ID 000461797400005

    View details for PubMedID 30341014

  • Cognitive Aids in Obstetric Units: Design, Implementation, and Use. Anesthesia and analgesia Abir, G. n., Austin, N. n., Seligman, K. M., Burian, B. K., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N. 2019


    Obstetrics has unique considerations for high stakes and dynamic clinical care of ≥2 patients. Obstetric crisis situations require efficient and coordinated responses from the entire multidisciplinary team. Actions that teams perform, or omit, can strongly impact peripartum and perinatal outcomes. Cognitive aids are tools that aim to improve patient safety, efficiency in health care management, and patient outcomes. However, they are intended to be combined with clinician judgment and training, not as absolute or exhaustive standards of care for patient management. There is simulation-based evidence showing efficacy of cognitive aids for enhancing appropriate team management during crises, especially with a reader role, with growing literature supporting use in obstetric and nonobstetric clinical settings when combined with local customization and implementation efforts. The purpose of this article is to summarize current understanding and available resources for cognitive aid design, implementation, and use in obstetrics and to highlight existing gaps that can stimulate further enhancement in this field.

    View details for DOI 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004354

    View details for PubMedID 31425259

  • Use of an Emergency Manual During an Intraoperative Cardiac Arrest by an Interprofessional Team: A Positive-Exemplar Case Study of a New Patient Safety Tool JOINT COMMISSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY AND PATIENT SAFETY Merrell, S., Gaba, D. M., Agarwala, A., Cooper, J. B., Nevedal, A. L., Asch, S. M., Howard, S. K., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N. 2018; 44 (8): 477–84


    An emergency manual (EM) is a set of evidence-based crisis checklists, or cognitive aids, that can improve team performance. EMs are used in other safety-critical industries, and health care simulation studies have shown their efficacy, but use in clinical settings is nascent. A case study was conducted on the use of an EM during one intraoperative crisis, which entailed the assessment of the impact of the EM's use on teamwork and patient care and the identification of lessons for effectively using EMs during future clinical crises.In a case study of a single crisis, an EM was used during a cardiac arrest at a tertiary care hospital that had systematically implemented perioperative EMs. Semistructured interviews were conducted with all six clinicians present, interview transcripts were iteratively coded, and thematic analysis was performed.All clinician participants stated that EM use enabled effective team functioning via reducing stress of individual clinicians, fostering a calm work environment, and improving teamwork and communication. These impacts in turn improved the delivery of patient care during a clinical crisis and influenced participants' intended EM use during future appropriate crises.In this positive-exemplar case study, an EM was used to improve delivery of evidence-based patient care through effective clinical team functioning. EM use must complement rather than replace good clinician education, judgment, and teamwork. More broadly, understanding why and how things go well via analyzing positive-exemplar case studies, as a converse of root cause analyses for negative events, can be used to identify effective applications of safety innovations.

    View details for PubMedID 30071967

  • Emergency Manuals: How Quality Improvement and Implementation Science Can Enable Better Perioperative Management During Crises. Anesthesiology clinics Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Macrae, C. n. 2018; 36 (1): 45–62


    How can teams manage critical events more effectively? There are commonly gaps in performance during perioperative crises, and emergency manuals are recently available tools that can improve team performance under stress, via multiple mechanisms. This article examines how the principles of implementation science and quality improvement were applied by multiple teams in the development, testing, and systematic implementations of emergency manuals in perioperative care. The core principles of implementation have relevance for future patient safety innovations perioperatively and beyond, and the concepts of emergency manuals and interprofessional teamwork are applicable for diverse fields throughout health care.

    View details for PubMedID 29425598

  • Factors associated with the use of cognitive aids in operating room crises: a cross-sectional study of US hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers. Implementation science : IS Alidina, S. n., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Hannenberg, A. A., Hepner, D. L., Singer, S. J., Neville, B. A., Sachetta, J. R., Lipsitz, S. R., Berry, W. R. 2018; 13 (1): 50


    Operating room (OR) crises are high-acuity events requiring rapid, coordinated management. Medical judgment and decision-making can be compromised in stressful situations, and clinicians may not experience a crisis for many years. A cognitive aid (e.g., checklist) for the most common types of crises in the OR may improve management during unexpected and rare events. While implementation strategies for innovations such as cognitive aids for routine use are becoming better understood, cognitive aids that are rarely used are not yet well understood. We examined organizational context and implementation process factors influencing the use of cognitive aids for OR crises.We conducted a cross-sectional study using a Web-based survey of individuals who had downloaded OR cognitive aids from the websites of Ariadne Labs or Stanford University between January 2013 and January 2016. In this paper, we report on the experience of 368 respondents from US hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers. We analyzed the relationship of more successful implementation (measured as reported regular cognitive aid use during applicable clinical events) with organizational context and with participation in a multi-step implementation process. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify significant predictors of reported, regular OR cognitive aid use during OR crises.In the multivariable logistic regression, small facility size was associated with a fourfold increase in the odds of a facility reporting more successful implementation (p = 0.0092). Completing more implementation steps was also significantly associated with more successful implementation; each implementation step completed was associated with just over 50% higher odds of more successful implementation (p ≤ 0.0001). More successful implementation was associated with leadership support (p < 0.0001) and dedicated time to train staff (p = 0.0189). Less successful implementation was associated with resistance among clinical providers to using cognitive aids (p < 0.0001), absence of an implementation champion (p = 0.0126), and unsatisfactory content or design of the cognitive aid (p = 0.0112).Successful implementation of cognitive aids in ORs was associated with a supportive organizational context and following a multi-step implementation process. Building strong organizational support and following a well-planned multi-step implementation process will likely increase the use of OR cognitive aids during intraoperative crises, which may improve patient outcomes.

    View details for PubMedID 29580243

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC5870083

  • Operating Room Crisis Checklists and Emergency Manuals. Anesthesiology Hepner, D. L., Arriaga, A. F., Cooper, J. B., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Gaba, D. M., Berry, W. R., Boorman, D. J., Bader, A. M. 2017; 127 (2): 384-392

    View details for DOI 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001731

    View details for PubMedID 28604405

  • Building Comprehensive Strategies for Obstetric Safety: Simulation Drills and Communication. Anesthesia and analgesia Austin, N., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S., Daniels, K., Arafeh, J., Grenon, V., Welle, D., Lipman, S. 2016; 123 (5): 1181-1190


    As pioneers in the field of patient safety, anesthesiologists are uniquely suited to help develop and implement safety strategies to minimize preventable harm on the labor and delivery unit. Most existing obstetric safety strategies are not comprehensive, lack input from anesthesiologists, are designed with a relatively narrow focus, or lack implementation details to allow customization for different units. This article attempts to address these gaps and build more comprehensive strategies by discussing the available evidence and multidisciplinary authors' local experience with obstetric simulation drills and optimization of team communication.

    View details for PubMedID 27749353

  • Emergency Manual Uses During Actual Critical Events and Changes in Safety Culture From the Perspective of Anesthesia Residents: A Pilot Study. Anesthesia and analgesia Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Pollock, J., Howard, S. K., Bereknyei Merrell, S. 2016; 123 (3): 641-649


    Emergency manuals (EMs), context-relevant sets of cognitive aids or crisis checklists, have been used in high-hazard industries for decades, although this is a nascent field in health care. In the fall of 2012, Stanford clinically implemented EMs, including hanging physical copies in all Stanford operating rooms (ORs) and training OR clinicians on the use of, and rationale for, EMs. Although simulation studies have shown the effectiveness of EMs and similar tools when used by OR teams during crises, there are little data on clinical implementations and uses. In a subset of clinical users (ie, anesthesia residents), the objectives of this pilot study were to (1) assess perspectives on local OR safety culture regarding cognitive aid use before and after a systematic clinical implementation of EMs, although in the context of long-standing resident simulation trainings; and (2) to describe early clinical uses of EMs during critical events.Surveys collecting both quantitative and qualitative data were used to assess clinical adoption of EMs in the OR. A pre-implementation survey was e-mailed to Stanford anesthesia residents in mid-2011, followed by a post-implementation survey to a new cohort of residents in early 2014. The post-implementation survey included pre-implementation survey questions for exploratory comparison and additional questions for mixed-methods descriptive analyses regarding EM implementation, training, and clinical use during critical events since implementation.Response rates were similar for the pre- and post-implementation surveys, 52% and 57%, respectively. Comparing post- versus pre-implementation surveys in this pilot study, more residents: agreed or strongly agreed "the culture in the ORs where I work supports consulting a cognitive aid when appropriate" (73.8%, n = 31 vs 52.9%, n = 18, P = .0017) and chose more types of anesthesia professionals that "should use cognitive aids in some way," including fully trained anesthesiologists (z = -2.151, P = .0315). Fifteen months after clinical implementation of EMs, 19 respondents (45%) had used an EM during an actual critical event and 15 (78.9% of these) agreed or strongly agreed "the EM helped the team deliver better care to the patient" during that event, with the rest neutral. We present qualitative data for 16 of the 19 EM clinical use reports from free-text responses within the following domains: (1) triggering EM use, (2) reader role, (3) diagnosis and treatment, (4) patient care impact, and (5) barriers to EM use.Since Stanford's clinical implementation of EMs in 2012, many residents' self-report successful use of EMs during clinical critical events. Although these reports all come from a pilot study at a single institution, they serve as an early proof of concept for feasibility of clinical EM implementation and use. Larger, mixed-methods studies will be needed to better understand emerging facilitators and barriers and to determine generalizability.

    View details for DOI 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001445

    View details for PubMedID 27541721

  • Checklists and multidisciplinary team performance during simulated obstetric hemorrhage. International journal of obstetric anesthesia Hilton, G., Daniels, K., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Lipman, S., Carvalho, B., Butwick, A. 2016; 25: 9-16


    Checklists can optimize team performance during medical crises. However, there has been limited examination of checklist use during obstetric crises. In this simulation study we exposed multidisciplinary teams to checklist training to evaluate checklist use and team performance during a severe postpartum hemorrhage.Fourteen multidisciplinary teams participated in a postpartum hemorrhage simulation occurring after vaginal delivery. Before participating, each team received checklist training. The primary study outcome was whether each team used the checklist during the simulation. Secondary outcomes were the times taken to activate our institution-specific massive transfusion protocol and commence red blood cell transfusion, and whether a designated checklist reader was used.The majority of teams (12/14 (86%)) used the checklist. Red blood cell transfusion was administered by all teams. The median [IQR] times taken to activate the massive transfusion protocol and transfuse red blood cells were 5min 14s [3:23-6:43] and 14min 40s [12:56-17:28], respectively. A designated checklist reader was used by 7/12 (58%) teams that used the checklist. Among teams that used a checklist with versus without a designated reader, we observed no differences in the times to activate the massive transfusion protocol or to commence red blood cell transfusion (P>0.05).Although checklist training was effective in promoting checklist use, multidisciplinary teams varied in their scope of checklist use during a postpartum hemorrhage simulation. Future studies are required to determine whether structured checklist training can result in more standardized checklist use during a postpartum hemorrhage.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.ijoa.2015.08.011

    View details for PubMedID 26421705

  • Emergency manual implementation: can brief simulation-based or staff trainings increase familiarity and planned clinical use? Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety / Joint Commission Resources Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Lei, V., Nandagopal, K., Bereknyei, S. 2015; 41 (5): 212-217


    Emergency manuals (EMs)-context-relevant sets of cognitive aids such as crisis checklists-are useful tools to enhance perioperative patient care. Studies in high-hazard industries demonstrate that humans, regardless of expertise, do not optimally retrieve or deploy key knowledge under stress. EM use has been shown in both health care simulation studies and other industries to help expert teams effectively manage critical events. However, clinical adoption and use are still nascent in health care. Recognizing that training with, access to, and cultural acceptance of EMs can be vital elements for successful implementation, this study assessed the impact of a brief in situ operating room (OR) staff training program on familiarity with EMs and intention to use them during critical events.Nine 50-minute training sessions were held with OR staff as part of a broader perioperative EM implementation. Participants primarily included OR nurses and surgical technologists. The simulation-based in situ trainings included why and how to use EMs, familiarization with format, simulated scenarios of critical events, and debriefings. A retrospective pre-post survey was conducted to determine participants' levels of EM familiarity and intentions to use EMs clinically.The 126 trained OR staff self-reported increases in awareness of the EM (p < .01), familiarity with EM (p < .01), willingness to use for educational review (p < .01), and intention to use during critical events (p < .01). Participants rated the sessions highly and expressed interest in more opportunities to practice using EMs.Implementing institutions should not only provide EMs in accessible places in ORs but also incorporate training mechanisms to increase clinicians' familiarity, cultural acceptance, and planned clinical use.

    View details for PubMedID 25977248

  • In response. Anesthesia and analgesia Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Howard, S. K. 2014; 118 (6): 1389-1390

    View details for DOI 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000176

    View details for PubMedID 24842188

  • Implementing emergency manuals: can cognitive AIDS help translate best practices for patient care during acute events? Anesthesia and analgesia Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Howard, S. K. 2013; 117 (5): 1149-1161


    In this article, we address whether emergency manuals are an effective means of helping anesthesiologists and perioperative teams apply known best practices for critical events. We review the relevant history of such cognitive aids in health care, as well as examples from other high stakes industries, and describe why emergency manuals have a role in improving patient care during certain events. We propose 4 vital elements: create, familiarize, use, and integrate, necessary for the widespread, successful development, and implementation of medical emergency manuals, using the specific example of the perioperative setting. The details of each element are presented, drawing from the medical literature as well as from our combined experience of more than 30 years of observing teams of anesthesiologists managing simulated and real critical events. We emphasize the importance of training clinicians in the use of emergency manuals for education on content, format, and location. Finally, we discuss cultural readiness for change, present a system example of successful integration, and highlight the importance of further research on the implementation of emergency manuals.

    View details for DOI 10.1213/ANE.0b013e318298867a

    View details for PubMedID 24108251

  • Simulation Exercises as a Patient Safety Strategy A Systematic Review ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE Schmidt, E., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Ho, L. A., McDonald, K. M. 2013; 158 (5): 426-?


    Simulation is a versatile technique used in a variety of health care settings for a variety of purposes, but the extent to which simulation may improve patient safety remains unknown. This systematic review examined evidence on the effects of simulation techniques on patient safety outcomes. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from their beginning to 31 October 2012 to identify relevant studies. A single reviewer screened 913 abstracts and selected and abstracted data from 38 studies that reported outcomes during care of real patients after patient-, team-, or system-level simulation interventions. Studies varied widely in the quality of methodological design and description of simulation activities, but in general, simulation interventions improved the technical performance of individual clinicians and teams during critical events and complex procedures. Limited evidence suggested improvements in patient outcomes attributable to simulation exercises at the health system level. Future studies would benefit from standardized reporting of simulation components and identification of robust patient safety targets.

    View details for Web of Science ID 000316058600010

    View details for PubMedID 23460100

  • Trigger Video of Simulated Intraoperative Cardiac Arrest. MedEdPORTAL Goldhaber-Fiebert, S., Harrison K, Mudumbai S, Howard S, McCowan K, Gaba D 2010
  • Knowledge-based errors in anesthesia: a paired, controlled trial of learning and retention CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Goldhaber-Fiebert, J. D., Rosow, C. E. 2009; 56 (1): 35-45


    Optimizing patient safety by improving the training of physicians is a major challenge of medical education. In this pilot study, we hypothesized that a brief lecture, targeted to rare but potentially dangerous situations, could improve anesthesia practitioners' knowledge levels with significant retention of learning at six months.In this paired controlled trial, anesthesia residents and attending physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital took the same 14-question multiple choice examination three times: at baseline, immediately after a brief lecture, and six months later. The lecture covered material on seven "intervention" questions; the remaining seven were "control" questions. The authors measured immediate knowledge acquisition, defined as the change in percentage of correct answers on intervention questions between baseline and post-lecture, and measured learning retention as the difference between baseline and six months. Both measurements were corrected for change in performance on control questions.Fifty of the 89 subjects completed all three examinations. The post-lecture increase in percentage of questions answered correctly, adjusted for control, was 22.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.0-28.4%; P < 0.01], while the adjusted increase at six months was 7.9% (95% CI 1.1-14.7%; P = 0.024).A brief lecture improved knowledge, and the subjects retained a significant amount of this learning at six months. Exposing residents or other practitioners to this type of inexpensive teaching intervention may help them to avoid preventable uncommon errors that are rooted in unfamiliarity with the situation or the equipment. The methods used for this study may also be applied to compare the effect of various other teaching modalities while, at the same time, preserving participant anonymity and making adjustments for ongoing learning.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s12630-008-9002-9

    View details for Web of Science ID 000263012800006

    View details for PubMedID 19247776

  • Male involvement in cardiovascular preventive healthcare in two rural Costa Rican communities PREVENTIVE MEDICINE Goldhaber-Fiebert, J. D., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Andorsky, D. J. 2005; 40 (6): 690-695


    Gender differences in health system usage can lead to differences in the incidence of morbidity and mortality. We conducted a pilot screening targeted towards men to evaluate gender differences in cardiovascular disease risk factor detection and time since last clinic visit.Three evening sessions in two communities screened 148 people, mean age 47.7 years. Height, weight, body mass index, blood pressure, blood glucose, and total cholesterol were measured. A questionnaire on past medical history was administered. Participants with elevated measurements were referred to appropriate care.Men accounted for 60.1% of those screened; 65.5% of the group was overweight, and 22.3% was obese with 42.6% hypertension, 39.2% hypercholesterolemia, and 2.7% high blood glucose. Among men aged 35 to 65, 65.2% were overweight, 20.3% obese, 46.4% hypertensive, 42.0% hypercholesterolemic, and 1.5% with high blood glucose. Within the last 2 years, 53.3% of men and 9.1% of women aged 35 to 65 had not visited a doctor (P = 0.004).A significant portion of those screened had elevated cardiovascular disease risk factors. Given that men visited doctors significantly less frequently, efforts to involve men in prevention of cardiovascular disease within these communities are warranted.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.09.009

    View details for Web of Science ID 000229006700011

    View details for PubMedID 15850866

  • Randomized controlled community-based nutrition and exercise intervention improves glycemia and cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients in rural Costa Rica DIABETES CARE Goldhaber-Fiebert, J. D., Goldhaber-Fiebert, S. N., Tristan, M. L., Nathan, D. M. 2003; 26 (1): 24-29


    The prevalence of type 2 diabetes, especially in developing countries, has grown over the past decades. We performed a controlled clinical study to determine whether a community-based, group-centered public health intervention addressing nutrition and exercise can ameliorate glycemic control and associated cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients in rural Costa Rica.A total of 75 adults with type 2 diabetes, mean age 59 years, were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. All participants received basic diabetes education. The subjects in the intervention group participated in 11 weekly nutrition classes (90 min each session). Subjects for whom exercise was deemed safe also participated in triweekly walking groups (60 min each session). Glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL and LDL cholesterol, height, weight, BMI, and blood pressure were measured at baseline and the end of the study (after 12 weeks).The intervention group lost 1.0 +/- 2.2 kg compared with a weight gain in the control group of 0.4 +/- 2.3 kg (P = 0.028). Fasting plasma glucose decreased 19 +/- 55 mg/dl in the intervention group and increased 16 +/- 78 mg/dl in the control group (P = 0.048). Glycosylated hemoglobin decreased 1.8 +/- 2.3% in the intervention group and 0.4 +/- 2.3% in the control group (P = 0.028).Glycemic control of type 2 diabetic patients can be improved through community-based, group-centered public health interventions addressing nutrition and exercise. This pilot study provides an economically feasible model for programs that aim to improve the health status of people with type 2 diabetes.

    View details for Web of Science ID 000185504900004

    View details for PubMedID 12502654