{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017707362534948742, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.1022727272727275, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The use of emergency manuals in perioperative crisis management: a cautious approach.

When an unexpected perioperative crisis arises, simulation studies have suggested that the use of an emergency manual (EM) may offset the large cognitive load involved in crisis management, facilitating the efficient performance of key steps in treatment. However, little is known about how well EMs will translate into actual practice and what is required to use them optimally. While EMs are a promising tool in the management of perioperative critical events, more research is needed to define best practices and their limitations. In the interim, cautious use of these cognitive aids is recommended, especially when the diagnosis is not straightforward, falls "in between" sections of the EM, or falls outside of the EM itself. Further research should focus on the efficacy of EMs as measured by the percentage of critical steps correctly performed by their users in scenarios that do not closely mirror one of the listed EM scenarios from the beginning or as the situation evolves.