Search

Objective: The aim of this article was to present an overview of the crew resource management (CRM) literature in healthcare. The first aim was to conduct an umbrella review on CRM literature reviews. The second aim was to conduct a new literature review that aims to address the gaps that were identified through the umbrella review. Methods: First, we conducted an umbrella review to identify all reviews that have focused on CRM within the healthcare context. This step resulted in 16 literature reviews. Second, we conducted a comprehensive literature review that resulted in 106 articles. Results: The 16 literature reviews showed a high level of heterogeneity, which resulted in discussing 3 ambiguities: definition, outcome, and information ambiguity. As a result of these ambiguities, a new comprehensive review of the CRM literature was conducted. This review showed that CRM seems to have a positive effect on outcomes at Kirkpatrick’s level 1, 2, and 3. In contrast, whether CRM has a positive effect on level 4 outcomes and how level 4 should be measured remains undetermined. Recommendations on how to implement and embed CRM training into an organization to achieve the desired effects have not been adequately considered. Conclusions: The extensive nature of this review demonstrates the popularity of CRM in healthcare, but at the same time, it highlights that research tends to be situated within certain settings, focuses on particular outcomes, and has failed to address the full scope of CRM as a team intervention and a management concept.

Background Most interventions to improve patient safety (Patient Safety Practices (PSPs)), are introduced without engaging front-line professionals. Administrative staff, managers and sometimes a few professionals, representing only one or two disciplines, decide what to change and how. Consequently, PSPs are not fully adapted to the professionals’ needs or to the local context and as a result, adoption is low. To support adoption, two theoretical concepts, Participatory Design and Experiential Learning were combined in a new model: Adaptive Design. The aim was to explore whether Adaptive Design supports adaptation and adoption of PSPs by engaging all professionals and creating time to (re) design, reflect and learn as a team. The Time Out Procedure (TOP) and Debriefing (plus) for improving patient safety in the operating theatre (OT) was used as PSP. Methods Qualitative exploratory multi-site study using participatory action research as a research design. The implementation process consisted of four phases: 1) start-up: providing information by presentations and team meetings, 2) pilot: testing the prototype with 100 surgical procedures, 3) small scale implementation: with one or two surgical disciplines, 4) implementation hospital-wide: including all surgical disciplines. In iterations, teams (re) designed, tested, evaluated, and if necessary adapted TOPplus. Gradually all professionals were included. Adaptations in content, process and layout of TOPplus were measured following each iteration. Adoption was monitored until final implementation in every hospital’s OT. Results 10 Dutch hospitals participated. Adaptations varied per hospital, but all hospitals adapted both procedures. Adaptations concerned the content, process and layout of TOPplus. Both procedures were adopted in all OTs, but user participation and time to include all users varied between hospitals. Ultimately all users were actively involved and TOPplus was implemented in all OTs. Conclusions Engagi

Background Most interventions to improve patient safety (Patient Safety Practices (PSPs)), are introduced without engaging front-line professionals. Administrative staff, managers and sometimes a few professionals, representing only one or two disciplines, decide what to change and how. Consequently, PSPs are not fully adapted to the professionals’ needs or to the local context and as a result, adoption is low. To support adoption, two theoretical concepts, Participatory Design and Experiential Learning were combined in a new model: Adaptive Design. The aim was to explore whether Adaptive Design supports adaptation and adoption of PSPs by engaging all professionals and creating time to (re) design, reflect and learn as a team. The Time Out Procedure (TOP) and Debriefing (plus) for improving patient safety in the operating theatre (OT) was used as PSP. Methods Qualitative exploratory multi-site study using participatory action research as a research design. The implementation process consisted of four phases: 1) start-up: providing information by presentations and team meetings, 2) pilot: testing the prototype with 100 surgical procedures, 3) small scale implementation: with one or two surgical disciplines, 4) implementation hospital-wide: including all surgical disciplines. In iterations, teams (re) designed, tested, evaluated, and if necessary adapted TOPplus. Gradually all professionals were included. Adaptations in content, process and layout of TOPplus were measured following each iteration. Adoption was monitored until final implementation in every hospital’s OT. Results 10 Dutch hospitals participated. Adaptations varied per hospital, but all hospitals adapted both procedures. Adaptations concerned the content, process and layout of TOPplus. Both procedures were adopted in all OTs, but user participation and time to include all users varied between hospitals. Ultimately all users were actively involved and TOPplus was implemented in all OTs. Conclusions Engagi

Background: Most interventions to improve patient safety (Patient Safety Practices (PSPs)), are introduced without engaging front-line professionals. Administrative staff, managers and sometimes a few professionals, representing only one or two disciplines, decide what to change and how. Consequently, PSPs are not fully adapted to the professionals' needs or to the local context and as a result, adoption is low. To support adoption, two theoretical concepts, Participatory Design and Experiential Learning were combined in a new model: Adaptive Design. The aim was to explore whether Adaptive Design supports adaptation and adoption of PSPs by engaging all professionals and creating time to (re) design, reflect and learn as a team. The Time Out Procedure (TOP) and Debriefing (plus) for improving patient safety in the operating theatre (OT) was used as PSP. Methods: Qualitative exploratory multi-site study using participatory action research as a research design. The implementation process consisted of four phases: 1) start-up: providing information by presentations and team meetings, 2) pilot: testing the prototype with 100 surgical procedures, 3) small scale implementation: with one or two surgical disciplines, 4) implementation hospital-wide: including all surgical disciplines. In iterations, teams (re) designed, tested, evaluated, and if necessary adapted TOPplus. Gradually all professionals were included. Adaptations in content, process and layout of TOPplus were measured following each iteration. Adoption was monitored until final implementation in every hospital's OT. Results: 10 Dutch hospitals participated. Adaptations varied per hospital, but all hospitals adapted both procedures. Adaptations concerned the content, process and layout of TOPplus. Both procedures were adopted in all OTs, but user participation and time to include all users varied between hospitals. Ultimately all users were actively involved and TOPplus was implemented in all OTs. Conclusions: En

__Abstract__ Since the publication of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) study “To Err is human”, followed by “Crossing the Quality Chasm” two years later, patient safety has become an important concern for all involved: patients, professionals and health care organisations (Bleich, 2005; Kohn, 2000). Over the last 10 years, significant improvements have been made and many innovative initiatives resulted in enhanced patient safety. At both national and international level checklists and performance indicators were developed, h

Patient safety is currently a central issue in health care. Many principles of patient safety, such as a safety management system, have been copied from high-risk industries. However, without a fundamental understanding of the differences between health care and industry, most incentives and instruments will translate into bureaucracy, control and repression. The necessary risk reduction for the patient can only be achieved through changes in the culture and hierarchical structure within the health care system. This requires bre

Objective: To assess surgical team members' differences in perception of non-technical skills. Design: Questionnaire design. Setting: Operating theatres (OTs) at one university hospital, three teaching hospitals and