Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41721785›Full record

ArticleATS scholar2026

Evaluating an interprofessional team coaching program to promote a human-centered ICU environment.

Jami L Simpson, John McCartney, Jacqueline M Kruser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ATS scholar, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Jami L SimpsonDivision of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
John McCartneyDivision of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Jacqueline M KruserDivision of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.

Funding

University of Wisconsin Department of Medicine Education Innovation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnology-driven ICU environments can be dehumanizing for critically ill patients, their families, and team members who care for them. Prior educational efforts to humanize the ICU have focused on training clinicians to provide human-centered care for patients and families, with relatively little attention on promoting human-centered environments for team members.

objectiveWe used the framework of team coaching to develop an interprofessional educational program focused on humanizing the ICU. We sought to evaluate whether this program improves participants' perceived capability to promote a human-centered environment for the ICU team.

methodsWe conducted a 3-year, mixed-methods evaluation of a novel interprofessional ICU team coaching program in a medical/surgical/trauma ICU within an academic medical center. The 3-session program is led by a certified coach, and annual cohorts are a subset of the ICU team. Session topics are: role identification, end-of-life care, and practices of dignity and respect. We conducted pre- and post-coaching participant surveys and qualitative content analysis of coaching reflections, open-ended survey responses, and an audio-recorded debriefing session.

resultsOver 3 years, 43 ICU team members representing 7 professional roles (advanced practice providers, attending physicians, chaplains, fellow physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, social workers) participated. The overall session attendance rate was 70%. Before participation, most reported a need for training to promote a human-centered environment for patients (78.1%), families (81.3%), and other members of the team (81.3%). After coaching, this unmet need decreased to 28.6% for patients (P < .01), 42.9% for families (P < .01), and 33.3% for team members (P < .01). Participants' self-reported ability to provide optimal human-centered care was similar pre-(84.4%) and post-coaching (81.8%; P = .80). Participants' scores on the interprofessional version of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure improved from 37.1 (95% CI 34.3-39.9) pre-coaching to 40.7 post-coaching (95% CI 38.8-42.6; P = .047). Qualitative analysis revealed commitment to growth in interprofessional relationships among participants and a desire to expand the program's reach.

conclusionOur findings confirm an unmet need among ICU team members for training in how to promote human-centered ICU environments and suggest that interprofessional team coaching is a promising tool to help meet this need.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsInterprofessional RelationsMentoringPatient Care TeamFemaleHumansMalePatient-Centered CareProgram Evaluationhuman-centered critical careICUinterprofessionalpowerful questionsteam coaching

Identifiers

PMID41721785
PMCPMC13220941

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.