Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction: Stress has been shown to impair performance during acute events. The goal of this pilot study was to investigate the effects of two simulation-based training interventions and baseline demographics (gender, age) on stress responses to simulated trauma scenarios. Methods: Sixteen (16) Emergency Medicine and Surgery residents were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Stress Inoculation Training (SIT) or Crisis Resource Management (CRM). Residents served as trauma team leaders in simulated trauma scenarios pre and post intervention. CRM training focused on non-technical skills required for effective teamwork. The SIT group focused on cognitive reappraisal, breathing and mental rehearsal. Training lasted 3 hours, involving brief didactic sessions and practice scenarios with debriefing focused on either CRM or SIT. Stress responses were measured with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (anxiety), cognitive appraisal (degree to which a person interprets a situation as a threat or challenge) and salivary cortisol levels. Results: Because the pre-intervention stress responses were different between the two groups, the results were analyzed with stepwise regression analyses. The only significant predictor of anxiety and cortisol responses were the residents appraisal responses to that scenario, explaining 31% of the variance in anxiety and cortisol. Appraisals of the post-intervention scenarios were predicted by their appraisals of the pre-intervention scenario and gender, explaining 73% of the variance. Men were more likely than women to appraise the scenarios as threatening. There were no differences in subjective anxiety, cognitive appraisal or salivary cortisol responses as a result of either intervention. Conclusion: Male residents, as well as those who appraised an initial simulated trauma scenario as threatening, were more likely to interpret a subsequent scenario as threatening, and were more likely to have larger subjective (anxiety) and physiological (cortisol) responses a subsequent scenario. Both CRM and SIT training were not effective in overcoming initial appraisals of potentially stressful events.
