Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26955279›Full record

ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2016

Interprofessional team management in pediatric critical care: some challenges and possible solutions.

Martin Stocker, Sina B Pilgrim, Margarita Burmester, Meredith L Allen, Wim H Gijselaers

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. How Teachers Meet in Interdisciplinary Teams: Hangouts, Distribution Centers, and Melting Pots.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Martin StockerNeonatal and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Children's Hospital Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Sina B PilgrimPediatric Intensive Care, University Children's Hospital Berne, Berne, Switzerland.
Margarita BurmesterPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
Meredith L AllenDepartment of Pediatrics, The Royal Children's Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Wim H GijselaersEducational Research and Development, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLRoyal Brompton Hospital · GBRoyal Children's Hospital · AUUniversity Children’s Hospital Bern · CHUniversity of Teacher Education Lucerne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAiming for and ensuring effective patient safety is a major priority in the management and culture of every health care organization. The pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) has become a workplace with a high diversity of multidisciplinary physicians and professionals. Therefore, delivery of high-quality care with optimal patient safety in a PICU is dependent on effective interprofessional team management. Nevertheless, ineffective interprofessional teamwork remains ubiquitous.

methodsWe based our review on the framework for interprofessional teamwork recently published in association with the UK Centre for Advancement of Interprofessional Education. Articles were selected to achieve better understanding and to include and translate new ideas and concepts.

findingsThe barrier between autonomous nurses and doctors in the PICU within their silos of specialization, the failure of shared mental models, a culture of disrespect, and the lack of empowering parents as team members preclude interprofessional team management and patient safety. A mindset of individual responsibility and accountability embedded in a network of equivalent partners, including the patient and their family members, is required to achieve optimal interprofessional care. Second, working competently as an interprofessional team is a learning process. Working declared as a learning process, psychological safety, and speaking up are pivotal factors to learning in daily practice. Finally, changes in small steps at the level of the microlevel unit are the bases to improve interprofessional team management and patient safety. Once small things with potential impact can be changed in one's own unit, engagement of health care professionals occurs and projects become accepted.

conclusionBottom-up patient safety initiatives encouraging participation of every single care provider by learning effective interprofessional team management within daily practice may be an effective way of fostering patient safety.

Indexed as

interprofessional team managementorganizational learningpatient safetypediatric intensive care unitpsychological safetyteamwork

Identifiers

PMID26955279
PMCPMC4772711
OpenAlexW2287658979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.