Simon Cooper1, Robyn Cant2, Cliff Connell3, Lyndall Sims4, Joanne E Porter5, Mark Symmons6, Debra Nestel7, Sok Ying Liaw8. 1. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Federation University, Gippsland Campus, Northways Road, Churchill 3842, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Brighton, Sussex, United Kingdom; School of Nursing, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. Electronic address: s.cooper@federation.edu.au. 2. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, PO Box 1071, Narre Warren 3805, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: robyn.cant@monash.edu. 3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, PO Box 1071, Narre Warren 3805, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: clifford.connell@monash.edu. 4. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, PO Box 1071, Narre Warren 3805, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: lasim5@student.monash.edu. 5. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Federation University, Gippsland Campus, Northways Road, Churchill 3842, Australia. Electronic address: joanne.porter@federation.edu.au. 6. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, PO Box 1071, Narre Warren 3805, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: mark.symmons@monash.edu. 7. School of Rural Health, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton 3800, Australia. Electronic address: debra.nestel@monash.edu. 8. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: nurliaw@nus.edu.sg.
Abstract
AIM: To test the resuscitation non-technical Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) for feasibility, validity and reliability, in two Australian Emergency Departments (ED). BACKGROUND: Non-technical (teamwork) skills have been identified as inadequate and as such have a significant impact on patient safety. Valid and reliable teamwork assessment tools are an important element of performance assessment and debriefing processes. METHODS: A quasi experimental design based on observational ratings of resuscitation non-technical skills in two metropolitan ED. Senior nursing staff rated 106 adult resuscitation team events over a ten month period where three or more resuscitation team members attended. Resuscitation events, team performance and validity and reliability data was collected for the TEAM. RESULTS: Most rated events were for full cardiac resuscitation (43%) with 3-15 team members present for an average of 45 min. The TEAM was found to be feasible and quickly completed with minimal or no training. Discriminant validity was good as was internal consistency with a Cronbach alpha of 0.94. Uni-dimensional and concurrent validity also reached acceptable standards, 0.94 and >0.63 (p=<0.001), respectively, and a single 'teamwork' construct was identified. Non-technical skills overall were good but leadership was rated notably lower than task and teamwork performance indicating a need for leadership training. CONCLUSION: The TEAM is a feasible, valid and reliable non-technical assessment measure in simulated and real clinical settings. Emergency teams need to develop leadership skills through training and reflective debriefing.
AIM: To test the resuscitation non-technical Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) for feasibility, validity and reliability, in two Australian Emergency Departments (ED). BACKGROUND: Non-technical (teamwork) skills have been identified as inadequate and as such have a significant impact on patient safety. Valid and reliable teamwork assessment tools are an important element of performance assessment and debriefing processes. METHODS: A quasi experimental design based on observational ratings of resuscitation non-technical skills in two metropolitan ED. Senior nursing staff rated 106 adult resuscitation team events over a ten month period where three or more resuscitation team members attended. Resuscitation events, team performance and validity and reliability data was collected for the TEAM. RESULTS: Most rated events were for full cardiac resuscitation (43%) with 3-15 team members present for an average of 45 min. The TEAM was found to be feasible and quickly completed with minimal or no training. Discriminant validity was good as was internal consistency with a Cronbach alpha of 0.94. Uni-dimensional and concurrent validity also reached acceptable standards, 0.94 and >0.63 (p=<0.001), respectively, and a single 'teamwork' construct was identified. Non-technical skills overall were good but leadership was rated notably lower than task and teamwork performance indicating a need for leadership training. CONCLUSION: The TEAM is a feasible, valid and reliable non-technical assessment measure in simulated and real clinical settings. Emergency teams need to develop leadership skills through training and reflective debriefing.
Authors: Elizabeth D Rosenman; Mark J Bullard; Kerin A Jones; Laura Welsh; Sarah M Brolliar; Benjamin R Levine; James A Grand; Rosemarie Fernandez Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2019-02-19
Authors: Stefanie C Hautz; Daniel L Oberholzer; Julia Freytag; Aristomenis Exadaktylos; Juliane E Kämmer; Thomas C Sauter; Wolf E Hautz Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Julia Freytag; Fabian Stroben; Wolf E Hautz; Stefan K Schauber; Juliane E Kämmer Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2019-02-08 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Robert Greif; Andrew Lockey; Jan Breckwoldt; Francesc Carmona; Patricia Conaghan; Artem Kuzovlev; Lucas Pflanzl-Knizacek; Ferenc Sari; Salma Shammet; Andrea Scapigliati; Nigel Turner; Joyce Yeung; Koenraad G Monsieurs Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 0.826
Authors: Arunaz Kumar; Sam Sturrock; Euan M Wallace; Debra Nestel; Donna Lucey; Sally Stoyles; Jenny Morgan; Peter Neil; Michelle Schlipalius; Philip Dekoninck Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-02-17 Impact factor: 2.692