ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2025
Changes in multidisciplinary perceptions of trauma video review following implementation of a novel program: let us go to the tape.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Under the lens: utilizing trauma video review for performance improvement, quality improvement and resident and fellow education.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026Review
- High-impact technical and patient management tips from the 2024 AAST Continuous Certification Course: preperitoneal pelvic packing, trauma video review, video-assisted thoracic surgery for retained hemothorax, and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractBackground: Trauma video review (TVR) is an evolving technology that can be used to measure technical and non-technical aspects of trauma care leading to meaningful improvements. Only 30% of centers currently use TVR, with non-users citing medicolegal concerns, staff discomfort with recording, and resource constraints as barriers to implementation. Multiple studies have shown established TVR programs are well-perceived by staff. Little is known about perceptions prior to, and after implementation of a new program. Objective: This study evaluated changes in TVR perceptions following implementation of a new program. Methods: A 15-question survey was distributed to emergency department and trauma surgery providers at a level I trauma center prior to, and 1 year after, implementation of TVR. A 5-point Likert scale was used to evaluate perceptions of the value of TVR, measures of team dynamics, and staff discomfort with recording. Results: A total of 106 pre-implementation and 82 post-implementation responses were recorded. Perceptions in several domains improved post-implementation including team leader effectiveness (3 (3-4) to 4 (3-4); p=0.002), communication (3 (3-4) to 4 (3-4); p<0.001), and self confidence in role (4 (3-4) to 4 (4-5); p=0.001). Staff discomfort with recording decreased post-implementation (3 (2-4) to 2 (2-3); p=0.002). Conclusion: Our study shows that perceptions of TVR changed favorably after implementation, particularly perceptions of team dynamics and provider discomfort with recording. These results can be used to mitigate staff concerns about TVR and encourage the development of new programs. Level of evidence: IV.
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.