ArticleBMJ open2024
Qualitative investigation of military surgical resuscitation teams: what are the drivers of success of a rapid response team?
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Resident and nurse attitudes toward a rapid response team in a tertiary hospital in South Korea.Acute and critical care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis qualitative study explores the characteristics of a specialised military medical rapid response team (MRRT), the surgical resuscitation team (SRT). Despite mixed evidence of efficacy, civilian MRRTs are widely employed, with significant variation in structure and function. Recent increased use of these teams to mitigate patient risk in challenging healthcare scenarios, such as global pandemics, mass casualty events and resource-constrained health systems, mandates a reconceptualisation of how civilian MRRTs are created, trained and used. Here, we study the core functions and foundational underpinnings of SRTs and discuss how civilian MRRTs might learn from their military counterparts.
designSemistructured interview-based study using Descriptive Qualitative Research methodology and Thematic Analysis.
settingRemote audio interviews conducted via Zoom.
participantsParticipants included 15 members of the United States Special Operations Command SRTs, representing all medical specialties of the SRT as well as operational planners.
resultsAdaptability was identified as a core function of SRTs and informed by four foundational underpinnings: mission variability, shared values and principles, interpersonal and organisational trust and highly effective teaming. Our findings provide three important insights for civilian MRRTs: (1) team member roles should not be defined by silos of professional specialisation, (2) trust is a key factor in the teaming process and (3) team principles and values result in and are reinforced by organisational trust.
conclusionThis study offers the first in-depth investigation of a unique military MRRT. Important insights that may offer benefit to civilian MRRT practices include enabling the breakdown of traditional division of labour, allowing for and promoting deep interpersonal and professional familiarity, and facilitating a cycle of positive reinforcement between teams and organisations. Future investigation of small team limitations, comparability to civilian MRRTs, and the team relationship to the larger organisation are needed to better understand how these teams function in a healthcare system and translate to civilian practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.