BACKGROUND: Effective collaboration and teamwork is essential in providing safe and effective hospital care. Prior research reveals deficiencies in collaboration on medical teaching units. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of an intervention, structured inter-disciplinary rounds (SIDR), on hospital care providers' ratings of collaboration and teamwork. METHODS: The study was a controlled trial comparing an intervention medical teaching unit with a similar control unit. The intervention, SIDR, combined a structured format for communication with a forum for regular interdisciplinary meetings. We surveyed providers on each unit and asked them to rate the quality of communication and collaboration they had experienced with other disciplines using a five-point ordinal scale. We also assessed the teamwork and safety climate using a validated instrument. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess the impact on length of stay (LOS) and cost. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven of 159 (92%) eligible providers completed the survey. Although resident physicians on each unit rated the quality of communication and collaboration with nurses similarly, a greater percentage of nurses gave high ratings to the quality of collaboration with resident physicians on the intervention unit as compared to the control unit (74% vs. 44%; p = 0.02). Providers on the intervention unit rated the teamwork climate significantly higher as compared to the control unit (82.4 +/- 11.7 vs. 77.3 +/- 12.3; p = 0.01). The difference was explained by higher teamwork climate ratings on the part of nurses on the intervention unit (83.5 +/- 14.7 vs. 74.2 +/- 14.1; p = 0.005). Ratings of the safety climate were not significantly different between units. Adjusted LOS and hospital costs were not significantly different between units. CONCLUSIONS: SIDR had a positive effect on nurses' ratings of collaboration and teamwork on a medical teaching unit. Further study is required to assess the impact of SIDR on patient safety measures.
BACKGROUND: Effective collaboration and teamwork is essential in providing safe and effective hospital care. Prior research reveals deficiencies in collaboration on medical teaching units. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of an intervention, structured inter-disciplinary rounds (SIDR), on hospital care providers' ratings of collaboration and teamwork. METHODS: The study was a controlled trial comparing an intervention medical teaching unit with a similar control unit. The intervention, SIDR, combined a structured format for communication with a forum for regular interdisciplinary meetings. We surveyed providers on each unit and asked them to rate the quality of communication and collaboration they had experienced with other disciplines using a five-point ordinal scale. We also assessed the teamwork and safety climate using a validated instrument. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess the impact on length of stay (LOS) and cost. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven of 159 (92%) eligible providers completed the survey. Although resident physicians on each unit rated the quality of communication and collaboration with nurses similarly, a greater percentage of nurses gave high ratings to the quality of collaboration with resident physicians on the intervention unit as compared to the control unit (74% vs. 44%; p = 0.02). Providers on the intervention unit rated the teamwork climate significantly higher as compared to the control unit (82.4 +/- 11.7 vs. 77.3 +/- 12.3; p = 0.01). The difference was explained by higher teamwork climate ratings on the part of nurses on the intervention unit (83.5 +/- 14.7 vs. 74.2 +/- 14.1; p = 0.005). Ratings of the safety climate were not significantly different between units. Adjusted LOS and hospital costs were not significantly different between units. CONCLUSIONS: SIDR had a positive effect on nurses' ratings of collaboration and teamwork on a medical teaching unit. Further study is required to assess the impact of SIDR on patient safety measures.
Authors: Kevin J O'Leary; J A Thompson; M P Landler; N Kulkarni; C Haviley; K Hahn; J Jeon; D B Wayne; D W Baker; M V Williams Journal: Qual Saf Health Care Date: 2010-04-29
Authors: Mangala Narasimhan; Lewis A Eisen; Christine D Mahoney; Frank L Acerra; Mark J Rosen Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Daniel L Davenport; William G Henderson; Cecilia L Mosca; Shukri F Khuri; Robert M Mentzer Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2007-10-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Marie J Cowan; Martin Shapiro; Ron D Hays; Abdelmonem Afifi; Sondra Vazirani; Cathy Rodgers Ward; Susan L Ettner Journal: J Nurs Adm Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 1.737
Authors: Peter Pronovost; Sean Berenholtz; Todd Dorman; Pam A Lipsett; Terri Simmonds; Carol Haraden Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: John B Sexton; Robert L Helmreich; Torsten B Neilands; Kathy Rowan; Keryn Vella; James Boyden; Peter R Roberts; Eric J Thomas Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2006-04-03 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: David C Mohr; Justin K Benzer; Varsha G Vimalananda; Sara J Singer; Mark Meterko; Nathalie McIntosh; Kimberly L L Harvey; Marjorie Nealon Seibert; Martin P Charns Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Rachel D A Havyer; Majken T Wingo; Nneka I Comfere; Darlene R Nelson; Andrew J Halvorsen; Furman S McDonald; Darcy A Reed Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mark L Wieland; Andrew J Halvorsen; Rajeev Chaudhry; Darcy A Reed; Furman S McDonald; Kris G Thomas Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Sallie J Weaver; Lisa H Lubomksi; Renee F Wilson; Elizabeth R Pfoh; Kathryn A Martinez; Sydney M Dy Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Hilary J Mosher; Daniel T Lose; Russell Leslie; Priyadarshini Pennathur; Peter J Kaboli Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2015-07-13 Impact factor: 2.655