Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41184336›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Crew resource management and threat and error management improve team communication in endoscopy: a prospective study.

Dominik Schweikart, Anna Melzer, Niklas Sturm, Benjamin Mayer, Martin Müller, Martin Wagner, Thomas Seufferlein, Matthias Baur, Dominique Walter, Benjamin M Walter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Dominik SchweikartEndoscopy Research Unit, University Hospital Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Anna MelzerEndoscopy Research Unit, University Hospital Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Niklas SturmEndoscopy Research Unit, University Hospital Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Benjamin MayerInstitute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Martin MüllerClinic for Internal Medicine I, Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Martin WagnerClinic for Internal Medicine I, Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Thomas SeufferleinClinic for Internal Medicine I, Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Matthias BaurCRM Trainer, Commercial Airline Pilot, Frankfurt, Germany.
Dominique WalterCRM Trainer, Commercial Airline Pilot, Frankfurt, Germany.
Benjamin M WalterEndoscopy Research Unit, University Hospital Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany. Benjamin.walter@uniklinik-ulm.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In gastrointestinal endoscopy, the ability to perform increasingly complex procedures has significantly heightened the demand for effective team cooperation. Crew Resource Management (CRM) and Threat and Error Management (TEM), proven strategies from civil aviation, have the potential to enhance team communication, workflow and patient outcomes in complex medical settings such as interventional endoscopy and therefore were implemented into endoscopy unit in this study. Together with qualified CRM trainers, individually tailored CRM and TEM elements such as communication guidelines, checklists and TEM-based dialogic team-time-outs were developed with the employees and integrated into endoscopic workflow at a high-volume interventional endoscopy center. Employee surveys on the effects were performed before and after the implementation. Implementation of CRM and TEM elements into endoscopy with civil aviation experts improved team communication, workflow and teamwork in endoscopy. Our study found a significantly reduced rate of misunderstandings caused by ambiguous communication during endoscopic interventions (p = 0.034), a significantly clearer defined distribution of tasks during the procedure (p = 0.020) and a significantly improved physicians' information transfer to the nursing assistants before the procedure (p = 0.047). More than 80% of all employees perceived that patient safety had improved after the intervention.

Indexed as

CommunicationCrew Resource Management, HealthcareEndoscopyEndoscopy, GastrointestinalMedical ErrorsPatient Care TeamHumansMalePatient SafetyProspective StudiesWorkflowLearning from aviationPatient safetyTeam communicationTeamwork

Identifiers

PMID41184336
PMCPMC12583798

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.