Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32046977›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2020

Doing our work better, together: a relationship-based approach to defining the quality improvement agenda in trauma care.

Eve Isabelle Purdy, Darren McLean, Charlotte Alexander, Matthew Scott, Andrew Donohue, Don Campbell, Martin Wullschleger, Gary Berkowitz, James Winearls, Doug Henry and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Teamwork and relational infrastructure: a qualitative study of modern UK general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  3. Connecting data science and translational simulation.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The team briefing: setting up relational coordination for your resuscitation.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2020
    Article
  11. 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

11 authors.

Eve Isabelle PurdyEmergency Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada epurdy@qmed.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-8098-5377
Darren McLeanCentre for Health Innovation, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Charlotte AlexanderEmergency Department, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Matthew ScottTrauma Service, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Andrew DonohueAnaesthetics, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Don CampbellTrauma Service/Emergency Department, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Martin WullschlegerTrauma Service/General Surgery, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Gary BerkowitzHigh Acuity Response Unit, Queensland Ambulance Service, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
James WinearlsIntensive Care Unit, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Doug HenryDepartment of Anthropology, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA.
Victoria BrazilEmergency Department, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrauma care represents a complex patient journey, requiring multidisciplinary coordinated care. Team members are human, and as such, how they feel about their colleagues and their work affects performance. The challenge for health service leaders is enabling culture that supports high levels of collaboration, co-operation and coordination across diverse groups. We aimed to define and improve relational aspects of trauma care at Gold Coast University Hospital.

methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods collaborative ethnography using the relational coordination survey-an established tool to analyse the relational dimensions of multidisciplinary teamwork-participant observation, interviews and narrative surveys. Findings were presented to clinicians in working groups for further interpretation and to facilitate co-creation of targeted interventions designed to improve team relationships and performance.

findingsWe engaged a complex multidisciplinary network of ~500 care providers dispersed across seven core interdependent clinical disciplines. Initial findings highlighted the importance of relationships in trauma care and opportunities to improve. Narrative survey and ethnographic findings further highlighted the centrality of a translational simulation programme in contributing positively to team culture and relational ties. A range of 16 interventions-focusing on structural, process and relational dimensions-were co-created with participants and are now being implemented and evaluated by various trauma care providers.

conclusionsThrough engagement of clinicians spanning organisational boundaries, relational aspects of care can be measured and directly targeted in a collaborative quality improvement process. We encourage healthcare leaders to consider relationship-based quality improvement strategies, including translational simulation and relational coordination processes, in their efforts to improve care for patients with complex, interdependent journeys.

Indexed as

Quality ImprovementAnthropology, CulturalHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesWounds and Injuriesorganizational theoryqualitative researchresuscitationteamwork

Identifiers

PMID32046977
PMCPMC7047507

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.