Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32576185›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical education2020

An observational study of self-monitoring in ad hoc health care teams.

Stefanie C Hautz, Daniel L Oberholzer, Julia Freytag, Aristomenis Exadaktylos, Juliane E Kämmer, Thomas C Sauter, Wolf E Hautz

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. 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

7 authors.

Stefanie C HautzDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Freiburgstrasse 16c, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Daniel L OberholzerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Freiburgstrasse 16c, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Julia FreytagSimulated Patient Program, Office of the Vice Dean for Teaching and Learning, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Aristomenis ExadaktylosDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Freiburgstrasse 16c, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Juliane E KämmerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Freiburgstrasse 16c, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Thomas C SauterDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Freiburgstrasse 16c, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Wolf E HautzDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Freiburgstrasse 16c, 3010, Bern, Switzerland. wolf.hautz@insel.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2445-984X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWorking in ad hoc teams in a health care environment is frequent but a challenging and complex undertaking. One way for teams to refine their teamwork could be through post-resuscitation reflection and debriefing. However, this would require that teams have insight into the quality of their teamwork. This study investigates (1) the accuracy of the self-monitoring of ad hoc resuscitation teams and their leaders relative to external observations of their teamwork and (2) the relationship of team self-monitoring and external observations to objective performance measures.

methodsWe conducted a quantitative observational study of real-world ad hoc interprofessional teams responding to a simulated cardiac arrest in an emergency room. Teams consisting of residents, consultants, and nurses were confronted with an unexpected, simulated, standardized cardiac arrest situation. Their teamwork was videotaped to allow for subsequent external evaluation on the team emergency assessment measure (TEAM) checklist. In addition, objective performance measures such as time to defibrillation were collected. All participants completed a demographic questionnaire prior to the simulation and a questionnaire tapping their perceptions of teamwork directly after it.

results22 teams consisting of 115 health care professionals showed highly variable performance. All performance measures intercorrelated significantly, with the exception of team leaders' evaluations of teamwork, which were not related to any other measures. Neither team size nor cumulative experience were correlated with any measures, but teams led by younger leaders performed better than those led by older ones.

conclusionTeam members seem to have better insight into their team's teamwork than team leaders. As a practical consequence, the decision to debrief and the debriefing itself after a resuscitation should be informed by team members, not just leaders.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceGroup ProcessesLeadershipSimulation TrainingAdultCardiopulmonary ResuscitationFemaleHeart ArrestHumansMalePatient Care TeamSelf-AssessmentSurveys and QuestionnairesVideotape RecordingAd hoc teamsDebriefingEmergency medicineInterprofessional educationPostgraduate educationResuscitationSelf-monitoring

Identifiers

PMID32576185
PMCPMC7313223

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.