Consistent high-level performance during perioperative critical events is essential for optimal patient outcomes. This study examined factors associated with clinician performance during standardized, high-fidelity simulated out-of-operating-room crisis events, focusing on relationships between experience, timing relative to primary board certification, prior crisis exposure, and measured performance.
Sixty clinically active board-certified anesthesiologists and 41 anesthesia trainees participated in a simulation-based assessment. Participants completed surveys capturing demographic information, clinical practice attributes, prior simulation exposure, and prior crisis-management experience. Survey responses related to clinical, simulation, and crisis experience were summarized using principal component analysis. Performance was measured using video-recorded, standardized scenarios and scored by trained, board-certified raters.
The study cohort included 60 board-certified anesthesiologists (BCAs) and 41 trainees: 22 junior trainees (6 to 18 months of training) and 19 senior trainees (24 to 48 months). Overall, participants were 55% male, had a mean age of 38 years (SD 8), and a mean total experience of 8.8 years (SD 6.7), where training time was included in that estimate. Two-thirds of the BCAs (67%) practiced in community settings. Each participant completed four different standardized 15-minute crisis scenarios conducted outside the operating room.
All scenario performances were video recorded and randomly assigned to trained, board-certified raters. Raters used task checklists and holistic scaled ratings to score performance. Video review and standardized scoring were intended to provide objective measures of crisis management behavior and decisions under simulated acute-care conditions.
A principal component analysis reduced the survey data into summary variables representing clinical practice attributes, prior simulation experience, and prior crisis-management experience. Mixed-effects regression models examined associations between performance ratings and those summary variables while adjusting for participant attributes, study site, and scenario effects.
Performance differed by level of training and overall experience. Senior trainees received the highest scores while junior trainees received the lowest. There was a statistically significant association between overall performance and combined years of training and experience (p = 0.008).
Prior exposure to clinical crises was associated with higher rated performance (p = 0.040). In contrast, neither routine clinical practice attributes (p = 0.97) nor prior simulation experience (p = 0.94) showed an association with higher performance in these models.
The study reports specific clinician behaviors that distinguished higher-performing participants. Those who rated higher were more likely to call for assistance, perform a physical examination of the patient, order additional diagnostic tests, escalate therapy such as providing greater hemodynamic support or broader antibiotic coverage, broaden the differential diagnosis, discuss concerns with a colleague, and deliver temporizing as well as definitive treatments.
Observed actions linked with higher ratings illustrate how experiential factors translated into specific crisis-management behaviors. High performers more often:
These repeated behavioral patterns provide a link between prior clinical crisis exposure and measurable differences in simulated perioperative care.
In this simulation-based evaluation, greater combined years of training and experience and prior exposure to clinical crises were associated with higher performance ratings during high-fidelity, out-of-OR perioperative crisis scenarios. The lack of association between routine clinical practice attributes or prior simulation exposure and higher ratings suggests that real-world crisis experience, rather than baseline practice setting or simulation frequency alone, may confer advantages in handling acute events in these scenarios.
The findings support the validity of simulation as an assessment tool for perioperative crisis management and reinforce the potential value of ongoing exposure to crisis management—whether clinical or structured training that replicates high-acuity conditions—to maintain and improve clinician performance.
The study received approval through a SingleSite IRB (#181006) with Vanderbilt University serving as the coordinating center. The authors report that participant consent and appropriate research reporting guidelines were followed. All data produced in the study are available upon reasonable request to the authors. Funding was declared from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R18-HS026158). Competing interests were disclosed by multiple authors as reported in the source.