Search

Background: Implementation of new practices in team-based settings requires teams to work together to respond to new demands and changing expectations. However, team constructs and team-based implementation approaches have received little attention in the implementation science literature. This systematic review summarizes empirical research examining associations between teamwork and implementation outcomes when evidence-based practices and other innovations are implemented in healthcare and human service settings., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO and ERIC for peer-reviewed empirical articles published from January 2000 to March 2022. Additional articles were identified by searches of reference lists and a cited reference search for included articles (completed in February 2023). We selected studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods to examine associations between team constructs and implementation outcomes in healthcare and human service settings. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess methodological quality/risk of bias and conducted a narrative synthesis of included studies. GRADE and GRADE-CERQual were used to assess the strength of the body of evidence., Results: Searches identified 10,489 results. After review, 58 articles representing 55 studies were included. Relevant studies increased over time; 71% of articles were published after 2016. We were unable to generate estimates of effects for any quantitative associations because of very limited overlap in the reported associations between team variables and implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings with high confidence were: 1) Staffing shortages and turnover hinder implementation; 2) Adaptive team functioning (i.e., positive affective states, effective behavior processes, shared cognitive states) facilitates implementation and is associated with better implementation outcomes; Problems in team functioning (i.e., negative affective states, problematic behavioral processes, lack of shared cognitive states) act as barriers to implementation and are associated with poor implementation outcomes; and 3) Open, ongoing, and effective communication within teams facilitates implementation of new practices; poor communication is a barrier., Conclusions: Teamwork matters for implementation. However, both team constructs and implementation outcomes were often poorly specified, and there was little overlap of team constructs and implementation outcomes studied in quantitative studies. Greater specificity and rigor are needed to understand how teamwork influences implementation processes and outcomes. We provide recommendations for improving the conceptualization, description, assessment, analysis, and interpretation of research on teams implementing innovations., Trial Registration: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews., Registration Number: CRD42020220168., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

This state of the science review brings together the disparate literature of effective strategies for enhancing and accelerating team performance. The review evaluates and synthesises models and proposes recommended avenues for future research. The two major models of the Input-Mediator-Output-Input (IMOI) framework and the Big Five dimensions of teamwork were reviewed and both will need significant development for application to future teams comprising non-human agents. Research suggests that a multi-method approach is appropriate for team measurements, such as the integration of methods from self-report, observer ratings, event-based measurement and automated recordings. Simulations are recommended as the most effective team-based training interventions. The impact of new technology and autonomous agents is discussed with respect to the changing nature of teamwork. In particular, whether existing teamwork models and measures are suitable to support the design, operation and evaluation of human-nonhuman teams of the future. Practitioner summary: This review recommends a multi-method approach to the measurement and evaluation of teamwork. Team models will need to be adapted to describe interaction with non-human agents, which is what the future is most likely to hold. The most effective team training interventions use simulation-based approaches.

Objective: Medical teams play a vital role in the delivery of safe and effective patient care. Toward the goal of becoming a high-reliability health system, the authors posit that the "perfect" medical team is one that develops their attitudes, behaviors, and cognitions (ABCs) to facilitate adaptation., Methods: The authors synthesized the literature (frameworks, measures, and conceptual models) on teamwork in healthcare (k = 161) to develop an evidence-based model of ABCs, which current evidence suggests, are requisite for medical team adaptation. Clinical vignettes were garnered from the media and other sources to illustrate how these ABCs-or failure in using these ABCs-can lead to positive or negative events in healthcare., Results: The resulting model contains the most frequently included ABCs in healthcare teamwork models, measures, and frameworks: psychological safety (41, 25.5%), situation assessment (66, 41.0%), shared mental models (56, 34.8%), team leadership behaviors (78, 48.4%), role awareness (64, 39.7%), team decision-making (61, 37.9%) and planning (41, 25.5%), conflict management (51, 31.7%), task coordination (71, 44.1%), adaptation (46, 28.6%), and backup behavior (54, 33.5%). The authors posit that communication and organizational conditions-other highly cited components-(141, 87.6%, and 90, 55.9%, respectively) serve as moderators of these relationships., Conclusions: The authors argue that each of these ABCs is critical for enhancing team adaptation and subsequently increasing patient safety. A list of practical tools and educational strategies that teams and organizations can use to improve their performance on each of these ABCs is provided., (Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

As the COVID-19 pandemic has ravaged the United States, health care teams are on the frontlines of this global crisis, often navigating harrowing conditions at work, such as a lack of personal protective equipment and staffing shortages, and distractions at home, including worries about elderly relatives or making childcare arrangements. While the nature and severity of stressors impacting health care teams are in many ways unprecedented, decades of psychological research exploring teamwork in extreme contexts can provide insights to understand and improve outcomes for teams in a crisis. This review highlights the psychological principles that apply to teams in a crisis and illustrates how psychologists can use this knowledge to improve teamwork for medical teams in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic., The review also provides a glimpse toward the future, noting both how psychologists can help health care teams recover and rebound, as well as how additional research can improve psychologists' understanding of teamwork in times of crisis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Introduction: Teamwork is a critical aspect of patient care and is especially salient in response to multiple patient casualties. Effective training and measurement improve team performance. However, the literature currently lacks a scientifically developed measure of team performance within multiple causality scenarios, making training and feedback efforts difficult. The present effort addresses this gap by integrating the input of subject matter experts and the science of multicasualty teams and training to (1) identify overarching teamwork processes and corresponding behaviors necessary for team performance and (2) develop a behavioral observation tool to optimize teamwork in multicasualty training efforts., Method: A search of articles including team performance frameworks associated with team training was conducted, leading to the identification of a total of 14 articles. Trained coders extracted teamwork processes and the corresponding team behaviors indicative of effective performance from these articles. Five subject matter experts were interviewed using the critical incident technique to identify additional behaviors., Results: Team situation awareness, team leadership, coordination, and information exchange emerged as the four core team processes required for team performance in scenarios with multiple patient casualties. Relevant behaviors and subbehaviors within these overarching processes were identified to inform a pilot behavioral framework of team performance., Conclusions: The processes and associated behaviors identified within this effort serve as scientifically grounded behaviors of team performance in the case of multiple patient casualties simulated training scenarios. Future work can use and further refine these results to ensure that measures of team performance are grounded in specific, observable, and scientifically delineated behaviors.

Objective: Measuring teamwork is essential in critical care, but limited observational measurement systems exist for this environment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a behavioral marker system for measuring teamwork in ICUs., Design: Instances of teamwork were observed by two raters for three tasks: multidisciplinary rounds, nurse-to-nurse handoffs, and retrospective videos of medical students and instructors performing simulated codes. Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to assess interrater reliability. Generalizability theory was applied to estimate systematic sources of variance for the three observed team tasks that were associated with instances of teamwork, rater effects, competency effects, and task effects., Setting: A 15-bed surgical ICU at a large academic hospital., Subjects: One hundred thirty-eight instances of teamwork were observed. Specifically, we observed 88 multidisciplinary rounds, 25 nurse-to-nurse handoffs, and 25 simulated code exercises., Interventions: No intervention was conducted for this study., Measurements and Main Results: Rater reliability for each overall task ranged from good to excellent correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.64-0.81), although there were seven cases where reliability was fair and one case where it was poor for specific competencies. Findings from generalizability studies provided evidence that the marker system dependably distinguished among teamwork competencies, providing evidence of construct validity., Conclusions: Teamwork in critical care is complex, thereby complicating the judgment of behaviors. The marker system exhibited great potential for differentiating competencies, but findings also revealed that more context specific guidance may be needed to improve rater reliability.

Background: Team science has been applied to many sectors including health care. Yet there has been relatively little attention paid to the application of team science to developing and sustaining primary care teams. Application of team science to primary care requires adaptation of core team elements to different types of primary care teams., Core Team Elements: Six elements of teams are particularly relevant to primary care: practice conditions that support or hinder effective teamwork; team cognition, including shared understanding of team goals, roles, and how members will work together as a team; leadership and coaching, including mutual feedback among members that promotes teamwork and moves the team closer to achieving its goals; cooperation supported by an emotionally safe climate that supports expression and resolution of conflict and builds team trust and cohesion; coordination, including adoption of processes that optimize efficient performance of interdependent activities among team members; and communication, particularly regular, recursive team cycles involving planning, action, and debriefing. These six core elements are adapted to three prototypical primary care teams: teamlets, health coaching, and complex care coordination., Conclusion: Implementation of effective team-based models in primary care requires adaptation of core team science elements coupled with relevant, practical training and organizational support, including adequate time to train, plan, and debrief. Training should be based on assessment of needs and tasks and the use of simulations and feedback, and it should extend to live action. Teamlets represent a potential launch point for team development and diffusion of teamwork principles within primary care practices., (Copyright © 2017 The Joint Commission. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Increased teammate familiarity in emergency medical services (EMS) promotes development of positive teamwork and protects against workplace injury., Methods: Measures were collected using archival shift records, workplace injury data, and cross-sectional surveys from a nationally representative sample of 14 EMS agencies employing paramedics, prehospital nurses, and other EMS clinicians. One thousand EMS clinicians were selected at random to complete a teamwork survey for each of their recent partnerships and tested the hypothesized role of teamwork as a mediator in the relationship between teammate familiarity and injury with the PROCESS macro., Results: We received 2566 completed surveys from 333 clinicians, of which 297 were retained. Mean participation was 40.5% (standard deviation [SD] = 20.5%) across EMS agencies. Survey respondents were primarily white (93.8%), male (67.3%), and ranged between 21-62 years of age (M = 37.4, SD = 9.7). Seventeen percent were prehospital nurses. Respondents worked a mean of 3 shifts with recent teammates in the 8 weeks preceding the survey (M = 3.06, SD = 4.4). We examined data at the team level, which suggest positive views of teamwork (M = 5.92, SD = 0.69). Our hypothesis that increased teammate familiarity protects against adverse safety outcomes through development of positive teamwork was not supported. Teamwork factor Partner Adaptability and Backup Behavior is a likely mediator (odds ratio = 1.03, P = .05). When dyad familiarity is high and there are high levels of backup behavior, the likelihood of injury is increased., Discussion: The relationship between teammate familiarity and outcomes is complex. Teammate adaptation and backup behavior is a likely mediator of this relationship in EMS teams with greater familiarity., (Copyright © 2017 Emergency Nurses Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: As a result of the recent proliferation of health care team training (HTT), there was a need to update previous systematic reviews examining the underlying structure driving team training initiatives., Methods: This investigation was guided by 10 research questions. A literature search identified 197 empirical samples detailing the evaluation of team training programs within the health care context; 1,764 measures of HTT effectiveness were identified within these samples. Trained coders extracted information related to study design and training development, implementation, and evaluation to calculate percentages detailing the prevalence of certain training features., Results: HTT was rarely informed by a training needs analysis (k = 47, 23.9%) and most commonly addressed communication strategies (k = 167, 84.8%). HTT programs that incorporated practice (k = 163, 82.7%) often employed high-fidelity patient simulators (k = 38, 25.2%) and provided participants with feedback opportunities (k = 107, 65.6%). Participants were typically practicing clinicians (k = 154, 78.2%) with a lower prevalence of health care students (k = 35, 17.8). Evaluations primarily relied on repeated measures designs (k = 123, 62.4%) and self-reported data (k = 1,257, 71.3%). Additional trends were identified and are discussed., Conclusions: Many trends in HTT practice and evaluation were identified. The results of this review suggested that, in the literature, HTT programs are more frequently following recommendations for training design and implementation (for example, providing feedback) in comparison to findings from previous reviews. However, there were still many areas in which improvement could be achieved to improve patient care., (Copyright © 2016 The Joint Commission. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

As the nature of work becomes more complex, teams have become necessary to ensure effective functioning within organizations. The healthcare industry is no exception. As such, the prevalence of training interventions designed to optimize teamwork in this industry has increased substantially over the last 10 years (Weaver, Dy, & Rosen, 2014). Using Kirkpatrick's (1956, 1996) training evaluation framework, we conducted a meta-analytic examination of healthcare team training to quantify its effectiveness and understand the conditions under which it is most successful. Results demonstrate that healthcare team training improves each of Kirkpatrick's criteria (reactions, learning, transfer, results; d = .37 to .89). Second, findings indicate that healthcare team training is largely robust to trainee composition, training strategy, and characteristics of the work environment, with the only exception being the reduced effectiveness of team training programs that involve feedback. As a tertiary goal, we proposed and found empirical support for a sequential model of healthcare team training where team training affects results via learning, which leads to transfer, which increases results. We find support for this sequential model in the healthcare industry (i.e., the current meta-analysis) and in training across all industries (i.e., using meta-analytic estimates from Arthur, Bennett, Edens, & Bell, 2003), suggesting the sequential benefits of training are not unique to medical teams. Ultimately, this meta-analysis supports the expanded use of team training and points toward recommendations for optimizing its effectiveness within healthcare settings. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).)

Introduction: Obstetric complications and adverse patient events are often preventable. Teamwork and situational awareness (SA) can improve detection and coordination of critical obstetric (OB) emergencies, subsequently improving decision making and patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a team training intervention in improving learning and transfer of teamwork, SA, decision making, and cognitive bias as well as patient outcomes in OB., Method: An adapted TeamSTEPPS training program was delivered to OB clinicians. Training targeted communication, mutual support, situation monitoring, leadership, SA, and cognitive bias. We conducted a repeated measures multilevel evaluation of the training using Kirkpatrick's (1994) framework of training evaluation to determine impact on trainee reactions, learning, transfer, and results. Data were collected using surveys, situational judgment tests (SJTs), observations, and patient chart reviews., Results: Participants perceived the training as useful. Additionally, participants acquired knowledge of communication strategies, though knowledge of other team competencies did not significantly improve nor did self-reported teamwork on the unit. Although SJT decision accuracy did not significantly improve for all scenarios, results of behavioral observation suggest that decision accuracy significantly improved on the job, and there was a marginally significant reduction in babies' hospital length of stay., Discussion: These findings indicate that the training intervention was partially effective, but more work needs to be done to determine the conditions under which training is most effective, and the ways in which to sustain improvements. Future research is needed to confirm its generalizability to additional OB units and departments., ((c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).)

Background: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of a telemedical robot on trauma intensive care unit (TICU) clinician teamwork (i.e., team attitudes, behaviors, and cognitions) during patient rounds., Materials and Methods: Thirty-two healthcare providers who conduct rounds volunteered to take surveys assessing teamwork attitudes and cognitions at three time periods: (1) the onset of the study, (2) the end of the 30-day control period, and (3) the end of the 30-day experimental period, which immediately followed the control period. Rounds were recorded throughout the 30-day control period and 30-day experimental period to observe provider behaviors. For the initial 30 days, there was no access to telemedicine. For the final 30 days, the rounding healthcare providers had access to the RP-7 robot (Intouch Health Inc., Santa Barbara, CA), a telemedical tool that can facilitate patient rounds conducted away from bedside., Results: Using a one-tailed, one-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare trust at Times 1, 2, and 3, there was no significant effect on trust: F(2, 14)=1.20, p=0.16. When a one-tailed, one-way repeated-measures ANOVA to compare transactive memory systems (TMS) at Times 1, 2, and 3 was conducted, there was no significant effect on TMS: F(2, 15)=1.33, p=0.15. We conducted a one-tailed, one-way repeated-measures ANOVA to compare team psychological safety at Times 1, 2, and 3, and there was no significant effect on team psychological safety: F(2,15)=1.53, p=0.12. There was a significant difference in communication between rounds with and without telemedicine [t(25)=-1.76, p<0.05], such that there was more task-based communication during telerounds. Telemedicine increased task-based communication and did not negatively impact team trust, psychological safety, or TMS during rounds., Conclusions: Telemedicine may offer advantages for some teamwork competencies without sacrificing the efficacy of others and may be adopted by intact rounding teams without hindering teamwork.

Purpose: The management of cancer varies across its type, stage, and natural history. This necessitates involvement of a variety of individuals and groups across a number of provider types. Evidence from other fields suggests that a team-based approach helps organize and optimize tasks that involve individuals and groups, but team effectiveness has not been fully evaluated in oncology-related care., Methods: We undertook a systematic review of literature published between 2009 and 2014 to identify studies of all teams with clear membership, a comparator group, and patient-level metrics of cancer care. When those teams included two or more people with specialty training relevant to the care of patients with cancer, we called them multidisciplinary care teams (MDTs). After reviews and exclusions, 16 studies were thoroughly evaluated: two addressing screening and diagnosis, 11 addressing treatment, two addressing palliative care, and one addressing end-of-life care. The studies included a variety of end points (eg, adherence to quality indicators, patient satisfaction with care, mortality)., Results: Teams for screening and its follow-up improved screening use and reduced time to follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal screen. Discussion of cases within MDTs improved the planning of therapy, adherence to recommended preoperative assessment, pain control, and adherence to medications. We did not see convincing evidence that MDTs affect patient survival or cost of care, or studies of how or which MDT processes and structures were associated with success., Conclusion: Further research should focus on the association between team processes and structures, efficiency in delivery of care, and mortality., (Copyright © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

This article discusses the care process among three groups (primary care, radiology, and surgery) aiding a 57-year-old woman during her screening mammography and diagnosis of breast cancer. This is the first in a series of articles exploring principles and topics relevant to teams guiding clinicians involved in cancer care. The challenges demonstrated in this case illustrate how clinicians work within and between groups to deliver this first phase of cancer care. The case helps demonstrate the differences between groups and teams. Focusing on the patient and the overall process of care coordination can help move groups toward becoming teams who deliver better care by identifying and managing goals, roles, and interdependent care tasks. Care providers and researchers can use the case to consider their own work and essential aspects of teamwork needed to improve care, patient outcomes, and the evidence that supports each., (Copyright © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: Teamwork is a vital component of optimal patient care. In both clinical settings and medical education, a variety of approaches are used for the development of teamwork skills. Yet, for team members to receive the full educational benefit of these experiential learning opportunities, postsimulation feedback regarding the team's performance must be incorporated. Debriefings are among the most widely used form of feedback regarding team performance. A team debriefing is a facilitated or guided dialogue that takes place between team members following an action period to review and reflect on team performance. Team members discuss their perceptions of what occurred, why it occurred, and how they can enhance their performance. Simulation debriefing allows for greater control and planning than are logistically feasible for on-the-job performance. It is also unique in that facilitators of simulation-based training are generally individuals external to the team, whereas debriefing on the job is commonly led by an internal team member or conducted without a specified facilitator. Consequently, there is greater opportunity for selecting and training facilitators for team simulation events. Thirteen Best Practices: The 13 best practices, extracted from existing training and debriefing research, are organized under three general categories: (1) preparing for debriefing, (2) facilitator responsibilities during debriefing, and (3) considerations for debriefing content. For each best practice, considerations and practical implications are provided to facilitate the implementation of the recommended practices., Conclusion: The 13 best practices presented in this article should help health care organizations by guiding team simulation administrators, self-directed medical teams, and debriefing facilitators in the optimization of debriefing to support learning for all team members.

Background: TeamSTEPPS (Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety) is a team-training intervention which shows promise in aiding the mitigation of medical errors. This article examines the construct validity of the TeamSTEPPS Teamwork Perceptions Questionnaire (T-TPQ), a self-report survey that examines multiple dimensions of perceptions of teamwork within healthcare settings., Method: Using survey-based methods, 1700 multidisciplinary healthcare professionals and support staff were measured on their perceptions of teamwork. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between the five TeamSTEPPS dimensions: Leadership, Mutual Support, Situation Monitoring, Communication, and Team Structure., Results: The analysis indicated that the T-TPQ measure is more reliable than previously thought (Cronbach's α=0.978). Further, our final tested model showed a good fit with the data (x(2) (df) 3601.27 (546), p<0.0001, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)=0.942, Comparative fit index (CFI)=0.947, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.057), indicating that the measure appears to have construct validity. Further, all dimensions correlated with one another, but were shown to be independent constructs., Conclusions: The T-TPQ is a construct-valid instrument for measuring perceptions of teamwork. This has beneficial implications for patient safety and future research that studies medical teamwork., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

The science of team training in healthcare has progressed dramatically in recent years. Methodologies have been refined and adapted for the unique and varied needs within healthcare, where once team training approaches were borrowed from other industries with little modification. Evidence continues to emerge and bolster the case that team training is an effective strategy for improving patient safety. Research is also elucidating the conditions under which teamwork training is most likely to have an impact, and what determines whether improvements achieved will be maintained over time. The articles in this special issue are a strong representation of the state of the science, the diversity of applications, and the growing sophistication of teamwork training research and practice in healthcare. In this article, we attempt to situate the findings in this issue within the broader context of healthcare team training, identify high level themes in the current state of the field, and discuss existing needs.

Objective: We sought to develop a reliable and valid tool for measuring teamwork among emergency medical technician (EMT) partnerships., Methods: We adapted existing scales and developed new items to measure components of teamwork. After recruiting a convenience sample of 39 agencies, we tested a 122-item draft survey tool (EMT-TEAMWORK). We performed a series of exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test reliability and construct validity, describing variation in domain and global scores using descriptive statistics., Results: We received 687 completed surveys. The EFAs identified a nine-factor solution. We labeled these factors 1) Team Orientation, 2) Team Structure & Leadership, 3) Partner Communication, Team Support, & Monitoring, 4) Partner Trust and Shared Mental Models, 5) Partner Adaptability & Back-Up Behavior, 6) Process Conflict, 7) Strong Task Conflict, 8) Mild Task Conflict, and 9) Interpersonal Conflict. We tested a short-form (30-item SF) and long-form (45-item LF) version. The CFAs determined that both the SF and the LF possess positive psychometric properties of reliability and construct validity. The EMT-TEAMWORK-SF has positive internal consistency properties, with a mean Cronbach's alpha coefficient ≥0.70 across all nine factors (mean = 0.84; minimum = 0.78, maximum = 0.94). The mean Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the EMT-TEAMWORK-LF was 0.87 (minimum = 0.79, maximum = 0.94). There was wide variation in weighted scores across all nine factors and the global score for the SF and LF. Mean scores were lowest for the Team Orientation factor (48.1, standard deviation [SD] 21.5, SF; 49.3, SD 19.8, LF) and highest (more positive) for the Interpersonal Conflict factor (87.7, SD 18.1, for both SF and LF)., Conclusions: We developed a reliable and valid survey to evaluate teamwork between EMT partners.

Background: Evaluation and measurement are the building blocks of effective skill development, transfer of training, maintenance and sustainment of effective team performance, and continuous improvement. Evaluation efforts have varied in their methods, time frame, measures, and design. On the basis of the existing body of work, 12 best practice principles were extrapolated from the science of evaluation and measurement into the practice of team training evaluation. Team training evaluation refers to efforts dedicated to enumerating the impact of training (1) across multiple dimensions, (2) across multiple settings, and (3) over time. Evaluations of efforts to optimize teamwork are often afterthoughts in an industry that is grounded in evidence-based practice. The best practices regarding team training evaluation are provided as practical reminders and guidance for continuing to build a balanced and robust body of evidence regarding the impact of team training in health care. THE 12 BEST PRACTICES: The best practices are organized around three phases of training: planning, implementation, and follow-up. Rooted in the science of team training evaluation and performance measurement, they range from Best Practice 1: Before designing training, start backwards: think about traditional frameworks for evaluation in reverse to Best Practice 7: Consider organizational, team, or other factors that may help (or hinder) the effects of training and then to Best Practice 12: Report evaluation results in a meaningful way, both internally and externally., Conclusions: Although the 12 best practices may be perceived as intuitive, they are intended to serve as reminders that the notion of evidence-based practice applies to quality improvement initiatives such as team training and team development as equally as it does to clinical intervention and improvement efforts.

Purpose: As the U.S. health care system enters a new era, the importance of team-based care approaches grows. How is the health care community ensuring that providers and administrators are equipped with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs) foundational for effective teamwork? Are these KSAs transferring into daily practice? This review summarizes the present state of practice for health care team training described in published literature. Drawing from empirical investigations of training effectiveness, the authors explore training design, implementation, and evaluation to provide insight into the shape, structure, and anatomy of team training in health care., Method: A 2009 literature search yielded 40 peer-reviewed articles detailing health care team training evaluations. Guided by 11 focal questions, two trained raters extracted details regarding training design, implementation, evaluation metrics, and outcomes., Results: Findings indicate that team training is being implemented across a wide spectrum of providers and is primarily targeting communication, situational awareness, leadership, and role clarity. Relatively few details indicate how training needs were established. Most studies collected data immediately posttraining; however, less than 30% collected data six months or more posttraining. Content analyses highlight the need for enhanced detail in published training evaluation reports., Conclusions: In many respects, health care team training implementation and evaluation align with best practices suggested from the science of training, adult learning, and human performance; however, opportunities for improvement exist. The authors suggest several mechanisms for furthering the health care team training evidence base to enhance patient safety and work environment quality for clinicians.

The provision of high-quality, efficient care results from the coordinated, cooperative efforts of multiple technically competent health care providers working in concert over time, spanning disciplinary and professional boundaries. Accordingly, the role of medical education must include the development of providers who are both expert clinicians and expert team members. However, the competencies underlying effective teamwork are only just beginning to be integrated into medical school curricula and residency programs. Therefore, continuing education (CE) is a vital mechanism for practitioners already in the field to develop the attitudes, behaviors (skills), and cognitive knowledge necessary for highly reliable and effective team performance.The present article provides an overview of more than 30 years of evidence regarding team performance and team training in order to guide, shape, and build CE activities that focus on developing team competencies. Recognizing that even the most comprehensive and well-designed team-oriented CE programs will fail unless they are supported by an organizational and professional culture that values collaborative behavior, ten evidence-based lessons for practice are offered in order to facilitate the use of the science of team-training in efforts to foster continuous quality improvement and enhance patient safety.

Background: Medical care is a team effort, especially as patient cases are more complex. Communication, cooperation, and coordination are vital to effective care, especially in complex service lines such as the operating room (OR). Team training, specifically the TeamSTEPPS training program, has been touted as one methodology for optimizing teamwork among providers and increasing patient safety. Although such team-training programs have transformed the culture and outcomes of other dynamic, high-risk industries such as aviation and nuclear power, evidence of team training effectiveness in health care is still evolving. Although providers tend to react positively to many training programs, evidence that training contributes to important behavioral and patient safety outcomes is lacking., Method: A multilevel evaluation of the TeamSTEPPS training program was conducted within the OR service line with a control location. The evaluation was a mixed-model design with one between-groups factor (TeamSTEPPS training versus no training) and two within-groups factors (time period, team). The groups were located at separate campuses to minimize treatment diffusion. Trainee reactions, learning, behaviors in the OR, and proxy outcome measures such as the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) and Operating Room Management Attitudes Questionnaire (ORMAQ) were collected., Results: All levels of evaluation demonstrated positive results. The trained group demonstrated significant increases in the quantity and quality of presurgical procedure briefings and the use of quality teamwork behaviors during cases. Increases were also found in perceptions of patient safety culture and teamwork attitudes., Discussion: The hospital system has integrated elements of TeamSTEPPS into orientation training provided to all incoming hospital employees, including nonclinical staff.

The patient safety literature from the past decade emphasizes the importance of teamwork skills and human factors in preventing medical errors. Simulation has been used within aviation, the military, and now health care domains to effectively teach and assess teamwork skills. However, attempts to expand and generalize research and training principles have been limited due to a lack of a well-defined, well-researched taxonomy. As part of the 2008 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference on "The Science of Simulation in Healthcare," a subset of the group expertise and group assessment breakout sections identified evidence-based recommendations for an emergency medicine (EM) team taxonomy and performance model. This material was disseminated within the morning session and was discussed both during breakout sessions and via online messaging. Below we present a well-defined, well-described taxonomy that will help guide design, implementation, and assessment of simulation-based team training programs.

Teamwork is integral to a working environment conducive to patient safety and care. Team training is one methodology designed to equip team members with the competencies necessary for optimizing teamwork. There is evidence of team training's effectiveness in highly complex and dynamic work environments, such as aviation and health care. However, most quantitative evaluations of training do not offer any insight into the actual reasons why, how, and when team training is effective. To address this gap in understanding, and to provide guidance for members of the health care community interested in implementing team training programs, this article presents both quantitative results and a specific qualitative review and content analysis of team training implemented in health care. Based on this review, we offer eight evidence-based principles for effective planning, implementation, and evaluation of team training programs specific to health care.

Across health care, teamwork is a critical element for effective patient care. Yet, numerous well-intentioned training programs may fail to achieve the desired outcomes in team performance. Hope for the improvement of teamwork in health care is provided by the success of the aviation and military communities in utilizing simulation-based training (SBT) for training and evaluating teams. This consensus paper 1) proposes a scientifically based methodology for SBT design and evaluation, 2) reviews existing team performance metrics in health care along with recommendations, and 3) focuses on leadership as a target for SBT because it has a high likelihood to improve many team processes and ultimately performance. It is hoped that this discussion will assist those in emergency medicine (EM) and the larger health care field in the design and delivery of SBT for training and evaluating teamwork.

Background: Medical teams are commonly called on to perform complex tasks, and when those tasks involve saving the lives of critically injured patients, it is imperative that teams perform optimally. Yet, medical care settings do not always lend themselves to efficient teamwork. The human factors and occupational sciences literatures concerning the optimization of team performance suggest the usefulness of a debriefing process--either for critical incidents or recurring events. Although the debrief meeting is often used in the context of training medical teams, it is also useful as a continuous learning tool throughout the life of the team. WHAT ARE GOOD DEBRIEFS?, An Overview: The debriefing process allows individuals to discuss individual and team-level performance, identify errors made, and develop a plan to improve their next performance., Best Practices and Tips for Debriefing Teams: THE DEBRIEF PROCESS: The list of 12 best practices and tips--4 for hospital leaders and the remainder for debrief facilitators or team leaders--should be useful for teams performing in various high-risk areas, including operating rooms, intensive care units, and emergency departments. The best practices and tips should help teams to identify weak areas of teamwork and develop new strategies to improve teamwork competencies. Moreover, they include practices that support both regular, recurring debriefs and critical-incident debriefings. Team members should follow these main guidelines--also provided in checklist form--which include ensuring that the organization creates a supportive learning environment for debriefs (concentrating on a few critical performance issues), providing feedback to all team members, and recording conclusions made and goals set during the debrief to facilitate future feedback.

Background: In health care, others' lives depend on the team operating at a level beyond the sum of its individual parts. A framework (a heuristic) represents a three-pronged approach to teamwork in health care that entails communication, coordination, and cooperation. These fundamental requirements of teamwork represent the constant interaction that team members undertake to become an effective team. Guidelines, tips, and examples show how the framework can be applied to establishing and enabling teams to provide safe, reliable care., Guidelines: The guidelines are as follows: (1) Support precise and accurate communication through a closed-loop communication protocol; (2) diagnose communication errors as you would any illness--Examine the team and look for symptoms, then treat the symptoms through team learning and self-correction; (3) recognize functional expertise by identifying and publicizing topical experts to evenly distribute work load and increase accuracy; (4) institute frequent practice opportunities to keep team skills in good shape because poorly honed skills will limit performance; (5) refine the team's shared mental models (SMMs) by pre-planning to build its implicit coordination skills, adaptability, and flexibility; (6) shape adaptive expertise by fostering a deep understanding of the task to increase team effectiveness; (7) build team orientation by taking steps to increase trust and cohesion to lower stress levels and increase satisfaction, commitment, and collective efficacy; and (8) prepare the team by providing learning opportunities for new competencies that will expose members to feedback and increase the team's overall efficacy., Conclusion: Although not a comprehensive list, the guidelines and tips represent the most essential requirements for effective teamwork.

Patient safety is one of the most pressing challenges in health care today, and there is no question that medical errors occur and that patients are worried about them. Currently, there is a belief that the availability of medical simulations and the knowledge gained from the science of team training may improve patient outcomes, and there is a paradigm shift occurring in many universities and training programs. This article discusses two strategies that, when combined, may reduce medical error in the labor and delivery suite: team training and medical simulation.

Team performance measurement is a critical and frequently overlooked component of an effective simulation-based training system designed to build teamwork competencies. Quality team performance measurement is essential for systematically diagnosing team performance and subsequently making decisions concerning feedback and remediation. However, the complexities of team performance pose a challenge to effectively measuring team performance. This article synthesizes the scientific literature on this topic and provides a set of best practices for designing and implementing team performance measurement systems in simulation-based training.

Many organizations have been using teams as a means of achieving organizational outcomes (such as productivity and safety). Research has indicated that teams, especially those operating in complex environments, are not always effective. There is a subset of organizations in which teams operate that are able to balance effectiveness and safety despite the complexities of the environment (for example, aviation, nuclear power). These high reliability organizations (HROs) have begun to be examined as a model for those in other complex domains, such as health care, that strive to reach a status of high reliability. In this paper we analyse the components leading to the effectiveness of HROs by examining the teams that comprise them. We use a systems perspective to uncover the behavioral markers by which high reliability teams (HRTs) are able to uphold the values of their parent organizations, thereby promoting safety. Using these markers, we offer guidelines and developmental strategies that will help the healthcare community to shift more quickly to high reliability status by not focusing solely on the organizational level.

Background: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has recommended that organizations establish interdisciplinary team training programs that incorporate proven methods for team management. Teamwork can be assessed during physician medical education, board certification, licensure, and continuing practice. Team members must possess specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs), such as the ability to exchange information, which enable individual team members to coordinate., Assessing Physician Teamwork: KSAs might be elicited and assessed across a physician's career, starting in medical school and continuing through licensure and board certification. Professional bodies should be responsible for the development of specific team knowledge and skill competencies and for promoting specific team attitude competencies. Tools are available to assess medical student, resident, and physician competence in these critical team KSAs., Challenges and Complexities in Team Performance Measurement: For teamwork skills to be assessed and have credibility, team performance measures must be grounded in team theory, account for individual and team-level performance, capture team process and outcomes, adhere to standards for reliability and validity, and address real or perceived barriers to measurement.

There is no question that interdisciplinary teams are becoming ubiquitous in healthcare. It is also true that experts do not necessarily combine to make an expert team. However when teams work well they can serve as adaptive systems that allow organisations to mitigate errors within complex domains, thereby increasing safety. The medical community has begun to recognise the importance of teams and as such has begun to implement team training interventions. Over the past 20 years the military and aviation communities have made a large investment in understanding teams and their requisite training requirements. There are many lessons that can be learned from these communities to accelerate the impact of team training within the medical community. Therefore, the purpose of the current paper is to begin to translate some of the lessons learned from the military and aviation communities into practical guidance that can be used by the medical community.