Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29792461›Full record

ReviewThe American psychologist

Teamwork in the intensive care unit.

Jennifer N Ervin, Jeremy M Kahn, Taya R Cohen, Laurie R Weingart

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The American psychologist. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
107citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

107 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

47 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Jennifer N ErvinDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh.ORCID 0000-0003-1896-1275
Jeremy M KahnDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh.
Taya R CohenSchool of Business, Carnegie Mellon University.ORCID 0000-0001-7325-793X
Laurie R WeingartSchool of Business, Carnegie Mellon University.ORCID 0000-0002-2542-7727

Funding

Patient Oriented Research and Mentoring in Critical Care Implementation ScienceK24HL133444 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI KAHN, JEREMY M · 2016 to 2018
$348k
NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL133444
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intensive care units (ICUs) provide care to the most severely ill hospitalized patients. Although ICUs increasingly rely on interprofessional teams to provide critical care, little about actual teamwork in this context is well understood. The ICU team is typically comprised of physicians or intensivists, clinical pharmacists, respiratory therapists, dieticians, bedside nurses, clinical psychologists, and clinicians-in-training. ICU teams are distinguished from other health care teams in that they are low in temporal stability, which can impede important team dynamics. Furthermore, ICU teams must work in physically and emotionally challenging environments. Our review of the literature reveals the importance of information sharing and decision-making processes, and identifies potential barriers to successful team performance, including the lack of effective conflict management and the presence of multiple and sometimes conflicting goals. Key knowledge gaps about ICU teams include the need for more actionable data linking ICU team structure to team functioning and patient-, family-, ICU-, and hospital-level outcomes. In particular, research is needed to better delineate and define the ICU team, identify additional psychosocial phenomena that impact ICU team performance, and address varying and often competing indicators of ICU team effectiveness as a multivariate and multilevel problem that requires better understanding of the independent effects and interdependencies between nested elements (i.e., hospitals, ICUs, and ICU teams). Ultimately, efforts to advance team-based care are essential for improving ICU performance, but more work is needed to develop actionable interventions that ensure that critically ill patients receive the best care possible. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorGroup ProcessesInterprofessional RelationsCritical CareHumansIntensive Care UnitsPatient Care Team

Identifiers

PMID29792461
PMCPMC6662208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.