SR

Team and leadership training (EIT #631): Systematic Review

profile avatar

ILCOR staff

Created: · Updated:

Commenting on this CoSTR is no longer possible

To read and leave comments, please scroll to the bottom of this page.

This CoSTR is a draft version prepared by ILCOR, with the purpose to allow the public to comment and is labeled “Draft for Public Comment". The comments will be considered by ILCOR. The next version will be labelled “draft" to comply with copyright rules of journals. The final COSTR will be published on this website once a summary article has been published in a scientific Journal and labeled as “final”.

Conflict of Interest Declaration

The ILCOR Continuous Evidence Evaluation process is guided by a rigorous ILCOR Conflict of Interest policy. The following Task Force members and other authors were recused from the discussion as they declared a conflict of interest: none applicable.

The following Task Force members and other authors declared an intellectual conflict of interest and this was acknowledged and managed by the Task Force Chairs and Conflict of Interest committees: Gilfoyle E. is the first author of two the studies and Yeung J. is the first author of one study included in this systematic review.

CoSTR Citation

Kuzovlev A, Monsieurs KG, Bhanji F, Bigham BL, Bray JE, Breckwoldt J Cheng A, Duff JP, Gilfoyle E, Hsieh MJ, Iwami T, Gerlup Lauridsen KG, Lockey AS, Ma M, Okamoto D, Pellegrino JL, Yeung J, Finn J, Greif R. - on behalf of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Education, Implementation and Teams Task Force. Team and leadership training in advanced life support courses Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations [Internet] Brussels, Belgium: International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Education, Implementation and Teams Task Force, 2020 January 4. Available from: http://ilcor.org

Methodological Preamble

This Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) is based on the CoSTR “Team and leadership training” that was published in 2015 simultaneously in the scientific journals Resuscitation and Circulation {Banji 2015 S242; Finn 2015, e203}. The current systematic review was conducted by the ILCOR Education Implementation and Teams (EIT) Task Force member Koen Monsieurs and the content expert Artem Kuzovlev with involvement of information specialists. The literature search strategy from the 2015 CoSTR (developed by an information specialist) was re-run in Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Database. Evidence for the effect of team and leadership training on educational and clinical outcomes was sought for adult, paediatric and neonatal courses. The search also included advanced trauma life support courses. For the selection of the studies the Rayyan software was used (https://rayyan.qcri.org). The new studies were assessed for potential bias according to the GRADE methodology and an evaluation of the certainty of the evidence was performed online using GradePRo (https://gradepro.org). An Evidence to Decision framework was developed and insights from the ILCOR EIT Task Force were sought using online meetings. All literature data and Task Force insights were taken into account when formulating the treatment recommendation.

PICOST

Population: among students who are taking advanced life support courses in an educational setting

Intervention: does inclusion of specific leadership or team training

Comparators: compared with no such specific training

Outcomes: improve patient survival, skill performance in actual resuscitations, skill performance at 3-15 months (patient tasks, teamwork, leadership), skill performance at course conclusion (patient tasks, teamwork, leadership), cognitive knowledge

Study Designs: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (non-randomized controlled trials, interrupted time series, controlled before-and-after studies, cohort studies) were eligible for inclusion. Studies evaluating scoring systems (no relevant outcome), studies with self-assessment as the only outcome, reviews and abstracts without full article were excluded.

Timeframe: As this is an update of a CoSTR published in 2015, Pubmed was searched from 1/1/2014, Embase was searched from 1/1/1999 and the Cochrane database was searched for all years. The literature search was updated to 28/11/2019.

PROSPERO Registration: submitted 3/1/2020, reply pending.

Consensus on Science

For the critical outcome “patient survival”, we found no randomized clinical trials but we found very low certainty evidence from 3 observational studies (downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision) {Andreatta, 2011 33; Neily 20101693; Clarke 2013 405} all showing improved patient survival. Andreatta {Andretta 201133} reported hospital survival from paediatric cardiac arrest over a period of 4 years after implementation of a hospital-wide mock code program, which included team training. These authors found an increase in survival from paediatric cardiac arrest at their hospital during the study period (from 33% to 48% within 1 year) in increments that correlated with the increasing number of mock code events. Neily {Neily 2010 1693} reported hospital mortality in surgical patients at 74 hospitals in the United States that had implemented a surgical team training program. The 74 hospitals in the training program experienced an 18% reduction in annual mortality (rate ratio RR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P=0.01) compared with a 7% decrease among the 34 hospitals that had not yet undergone training (RR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.80-1.06; P=0.59). Clarke {Clarke 2013 405} studied if establishing a specialist, second-tier paramedic response for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was feasible and he reported a rate of return of spontaneous circulation of 22.5% (the national average was 16%). Because of the high degree of heterogeneity regarding context, intervention and the way outcomes were measured, no meta-analyses could be performed.

For the critical outcome “skill performance in actual resuscitations” we found very low certainty evidence from a single randomized controlled trial {Weidman 2010 1556}, downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision. The study randomized 32 internal medicine residents to receive simulation training with a focus on the role of the resuscitation team leader versus no additional training but did not find an effect on CPR quality during actual resuscitation of patients. We also found very low certainty evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness and imprecision) from 4 observational studies {Nadler 2011 163; Ong 2013 508; Su2014 856; Spitzer 2019 158} which reported improved CPR depth, rate, ratio, team communication and improved deployment times of mechanical devices.

For the important outcome “skill performance at 3-15 months (patient tasks)”, we found very low certainty evidence from three randomized trials (downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision) which reported improvement in patient tasks {Hunziker 2010 1086; Thomas 2010 539; Blackwood 2014 e168}. Because of the high degree of heterogeneity regarding context, intervention and the specific outcomes that were reported, no meta-analyses could be performed.

Hunziker {Hunziker 2010 1086} compared instructions on resuscitation technique versus instructions on leadership and communication in medical students during simulated cardiac arrest. Hands-on time was significantly longer in the leadership instruction groups (120 seconds; IQR, 98 –135; vs. 87 seconds; IQR, 61–108; P<0.001). The time elapsed until CPR was started was significantly shorter in the leadership instruction group (P<0.018).

Thomas {Thomas 2010 539} studied interns for paediatrics, combined paediatrics and internal medicine, family medicine, emergency medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology. They compared team training in neonatal resuscitation using high and low fidelity manikins. They found no evidence that trained participants maintained more vigilance (median: 100% [control subjects] vs. 100% [intervention]; P=0.951) or workload management (median: 100% [control subjects] vs. 100% [intervention]; P=0.549) than did control subjects. The intervention groups had shorter duration resuscitations compared to control groups immediately after training (mean: 9.3 minutes [control subjects] vs. 8.3 minutes [intervention]; P=0.314).

Blackwood {Blackwood 2014 e168} randomized paediatric residents to a 1-hour “crisis resource management” (CRM) instruction or no additional training. The “overall Ottawa Global Rating Scale (OGRS)” score (maximum=7) of the CRM group was 1.15 points (95% CI, 0.2–2.1, P=0.02) higher than the control group, and this increase was maintained at the 3-month retest scenario. The summative score of all seven categories (out of 42) was 6.7 points (1.6–11.8, P= 0.01) higher in the CRM group, and this difference remained at 3 months.

We found no observational studies for this outcome.

For the important outcome “skill performance at 3-15 months (teamwork)” we found low certainty evidence from a single randomized trial {Thomas 2010 539}, downgraded for bias and imprecision.

Thomas {Thomas 2010 539} studied interns for paediatrics, combined paediatrics and internal medicine, family medicine, emergency medicine, and obstetrics and gynaecology. They compared team training in neonatal resuscitation using high and low fidelity manikins. Interns who received team training demonstrated more frequent teamwork behaviours in the 6-month follow-up megacodes than control subjects (mean: 11.8 vs 10.0 behaviours per minute; P=0.03).

We also found very low certainty evidence (downgraded for risk of bias) from 2 observational studies which reported improved teamwork scores and faculty ratings after CPR team training {Garbee 2013 340; AbdelFattah 2018 912}.

For the important outcome “skill performance at 3-15 months (leadership)”, we found moderate certainty evidence from a single randomized trial {Hunziker 2010 1086}, downgraded for risk of bias.

Hunziker {Hunziker 2010 1086} compared instructions on resuscitation technique versus instructions on leadership and communication in medical students during simulated cardiac arrest. In the follow-up visit more leadership utterances (7; IQR 4 –10; vs. 5; IQR 2–8; P=0.02) were documented.

We also found very low certainty evidence from 2 observational studies (downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision) which reported improved checklist scores and self-reported surveys after CPR team training {Gilfoyle 2007 e276; AbdelFattah 2018 912}.

For the important outcome “skill performance at course conclusion (patient tasks)”, we found low certainty evidence from twelve randomized trials {Hunziker 2009 3; Thomas 2010 539; Hunziker 2010 1086; Chung 2011 690; Castelao 2011 1338; Jankouskas 2011 316; Fernandez 2013 2551; Blackwood 2014 e168; Semler 2015 512; Castelao 2015 116; Couper 2017 e019009; Haffner 2017 7}, downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision. Eight of these 12 randomized trials{Hunziker 2009 3; Thomas 2010 539; Hunziker 2010 1086; Castelao 2011 1338; Jankouskas 2011 316; Fernandez 2013 2551; Blackwood 2014 e168; Haffner 2017 7} reported improvement in patient tasks whereas 4 trials were neutral {Chung 2011 690; Semler 2015 512; Castelao 2015 116; Couper 2017 e019009}. Because of the high degree of heterogeneity regarding context, intervention, the specific outcomes that were reported and the differences in outcome measurements, no meta-analyses could be performed.

Hunziker {Hunziker 2009 3} compared the performance of teams of general practitioners and hospital physicians in simulated cardiac arrest with and without prior team training. Teams without prior team building had less hands-on time during the first 180 seconds of the arrest (93±37 vs. 124±33 sec, P<0.0001) and they delayed their first defibrillation (67±42 vs. 107±46 sec, P< 0.0001).

Thomas {Thomas 2010 539} studied interns for paediatrics, combined paediatrics and internal medicine, family medicine, emergency medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology. They compared team training in neonatal resuscitation using high and low fidelity manikins. Teams that had received team training completed the resuscitation an average of 2.6 minutes faster than did control subjects, a time reduction of 24% (95% CI: 12%–37%).

Hunziker {Hunziker 2010 1086} compared instructions on resuscitation technique versus instructions on leadership and communication in medical students during simulated cardiac arrest. The leadership instruction group demonstrated a longer hands-on time (120 sec; IQR, 98–135 vs. 87 sec; IQR, 61–108 ; P<0.001), a shorter median time to start CPR (44 sec; IQR, 32–62; vs. 67 sec; IQR, 43–79; P=.018).

Chung {Chung 2011 690} compared training using a didactic lecture and simulation with debriefing with training using a resuscitation script in doctors and nurses. After training there were no differences between the two groups in the score for performance in a simulated setting (control: 5.5±11.4 vs script: 4.7±9.6, P=0.838).

Castelao {Castelao 2011 1338} compared video based CRM training embedded in an advanced life support course (ALS) for final year medical students versus a control group receiving additional ALS training. No flow times were significantly lower in the CRM group (31.4 ± 6.1% vs. 36.3 ± 6.6%, P=0.014).

Jankouskas {Jankouskas 2011 316} randomized nursing and medical students to basic life support (using a bag valve mask device and oxygen) plus CRM training or basic life support only. CRM training predicted 13% of the variance in task management (P=0.05), and CRM training and situation awareness predicted 20% of the variance (P=0.04) in response time to chest compressions.

Fernandez {Fernandez 2013 2551} studied a 25-minute computer-based teamwork training versus placebo training in medical students and emergency medicine residents. Teams in the training condition demonstrated better patient care (F1, 42] = 4.66, P< 0.05; η= 10%) than teams in the placebo group.

Blackwood {Blackwood 2014 e168} randomized paediatric residents to a 1-hour CRM instruction or no additional training. The CRM group placed monitor leads 24.6 seconds earlier (P=0.02), placed an intravenous catheter 47.1 seconds sooner (P=0.04), called for help 50.4 seconds faster (P=0.03) and checked for a pulse after noticing a rhythm change 84.9 seconds quicker (P=0.01). There was no difference in the time to initiation of CPR.

Semler {Semler 2015 512} compared three teamwork teaching modalities for incoming internal medicine interns: didactic, demonstration-based, or simulation-based instruction. Clinical performance scores in a simulated setting were similar between the three groups and correlated only weakly with teamwork behavior (coefficient of determination [Rs2]=0.267, P<0.001).

Castelao {Castelao 2015 116} randomized teams of medical students to CRM team leader training or additional ALS training. In a simulated environment, CRM trained team leaders showed better adherence to the ALS algorithm (difference −6.4 (95 % CI -10.3,−2.4), P= 0.002) but there was no improvement in no flow time.

Couper {Couper 2017 e019009} randomized health professionals with intermediate or advanced resuscitation training to receive standard mechanical chest compression device training or pit-crew device training (up to 1 h). Regarding chest compression flow fraction in the minute preceding the first mechanical chest compression, pit-crew training was not superior to standard training (0.76 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.79) vs 0.77 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.82), mean difference −0.01 (95% CI −0.06 to 0.03), P=0.572).

Haffner {Haffner 2017 7} randomized final-year medical students to receive a 10-min computer-based CRM training or a control training on ethics. After the CRM training, team leaders corrected improper chest compressions (35.5%) significantly more often compared with controls (7.7%, P=0.03).

We also found very low certainty evidence from four observational studies {DeVita 2005 326; Makinen 2007 264; Yeung 2012 2617; Gilfoyle 2017 e62], downgraded for risk of bias and indirectness, that showed improved resuscitation skills (time to initiation of chest compression, correct positioning of defibrillator electrodes, time to defibrillation, shorter pre-shock pauses etc) and improved simulated survival.

For the important outcome “skill performance at course conclusion (teamwork)”, we found low certainty evidence from ten randomized trials {Thomas 2007 409; Thomas 2010 539; Chung 2011 690; Jankouskas 2011 316; Fernandez 2013 2551; Blackwood 2014 e168; Semler 2015 512; Rovamo 2015 671; Lorello 2016 136; Couper 2017 e019009}, downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision. Seven out of these 10 randomized trials showed improved teamwork whereas 3 trials were neutral {Chung 2011 690; Semler 2015 512; Rovamo 2015 671}. Because of the high degree of heterogeneity regarding context, intervention and the specific outcomes that were reported, no meta-analyses could be performed.

Thomas {Thomas 2007 409} randomized Interns to receive a neonatal resuscitation course with team training or a standard course. The interns with team training exhibited more frequent team behaviours (number of episodes per minute (95% CI)) than interns in the control group: information sharing 1.06 (0.24, 1.17) vs 0.13 (0.00, 0.43); inquiry 0.35 (0.11, 0.42) vs 0.09 (0.00, 0.10); assertion 1.80 (1.21, 2.25) vs 0.64 (0.26, 0.91); and any team behaviour 3.34 (2.26, 4.11) vs 1.03 (0.48, 1.30) (P<0.008 for all comparisons).

Thomas {Thomas 2010 539} studied interns for pediatrics, combined pediatrics and internal medicine, family medicine, emergency medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology. They compared team training in neonatal resuscitation using high and low fidelity manikins. The high-fidelity team training showed more teamwork than control subjects (12.8 vs. 9.0 behaviors per minute; P<0.001). Team training groups had better workload management (control subjects: 89.3%; low-fidelity training group: 98.0% [P<0.001]; high-fidelity training group: 98.8%; high-fidelity training group versus control subjects [P<0.001)].

Chung {Chung 2011 690} compared training using a didactic lecture and simulation with debriefing with training using a resuscitation script in doctors and nurses. There were no differences in the score improvement after training between the two groups in dynamics (C: 9.16±12.6 vs. S: 7.4±13.7, P=0.715), performance (C: 5.5±11.4 vs. S: 4.7±9.6, P=0.838) and total scores (C: 14.6±20.1 vs. S: 12.2±19.5, P=0.726).

Jankouskas {Jankouskas 2011 316} randomized nursing and medical students to basic life support (using a bag valve mask device and oxygen) plus CRM training or basic life support only. CRM training predicted 13% in task management (P=0.05), 15% of the variance in teamworking (P=0.04), and 18% of the variance in situation awareness (P=0.03).

Fernandez {Fernandez 2013 2551} studied a 25-minute computer-based teamwork training versus placebo training in medical students and emergency medicine residents. Teams in the training condition demonstrated better teamwork (F[1, 42]=4.81, P< 0.05; η= 10%).

Blackwood {Blackwood 2014 e168} randomized paediatric residents to a 1-hour CRM instruction or no additional training. The intervention group had overall CRM performance scores 1.15 points higher (Ottawa Global Rating Scale) out of 7 (P=0.02).

Semler {Semler 2015 512} compared three teamwork teaching modalities for incoming internal medicine interns: didactic, demonstration-based, or simulation-based instruction. The average overall Teamwork Behavioral Rater score for those who received demonstration-based training was similar to simulation participation (4.40±1.15 vs.4.10±0.95, P=0.917) and significantly higher than didactic instruction (4.40±1.15 vs. 3.10±0.51, P=0.045).

Rovamo {Rovamo 2015 671} evaluated the impact of CRM and anaesthesia non-technical skills instruction on teamwork during simulated newborn emergencies performed by doctors and nurses. They could not show that the CRM instruction improved teamwork performance.

Lorello {Lorello 2016 136} studied mental rehearsal of advanced trauma life support by residents in anaesthesiology, emergency medicine, and surgery. The mental practice group engaged in 20 minutes of mental practice, and the control group received 20 minutes of advanced trauma life support training. The mental practice group showed improved teamwork behaviour as assessed by the Mayo High Performance Teamwork Scale (r=0.67, P<0.01).

Couper {Couper 2017 e019009} randomized health professionals with intermediate or advanced resuscitation training to receive standard mechanical chest compression device training or pit-crew device training (up to 1 h). PIT-crew training did not result in improvement of the global Team Emergency Assessment Tool score (out of 10): PIT-crew training 8.1 (7.2 to 8.9) vs. standard training 7.9 (7.3 to 8.6), mean difference (95% CI) 0.15 (−0.87 to 1.17), P=0.760.

We also found very low certainty evidence from three observational studies {Makinen 2007 264; Garbee 2013 340; AbdelFattah 2018 912}, downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness and imprecision; which found improved teamwork scores and faculty ratings after CPR team training.

For the important outcome “skill performance at course conclusion (leadership)” we found low certainty evidence from six randomised trials {Cooper 2001 33; Hunziker 2009 3; Hunziker 2010 1086; Castelao 2011 1338; Castelao 2015 116; Haffner2017 7} downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision. Five of these 6 trials showed improved leadership whereas one trial was neutral {Castelao 2011 1338}. Because of the high degree of heterogeneity regarding context, intervention and the specific outcomes that were reported, no meta-analyses could be performed.

Cooper {Cooper 2001 33} studied the effect of a 75 minutes leadership seminar during an ALS course for doctors, nurses and technicians. The leadership training program improved the leadership performance in a simulated setting.

Hunziker {Hunziker 2009 3} compared the performance of teams of general practitioners and hospital physicians in simulated cardiac arrest with and without prior team training. Teams without prior team training made less leadership statements during simulated cardiac arrest (15±5 vs. 21±6, P<0.0001).

Hunziker {Hunziker 2010 1086} compared instructions on resuscitation technique versus instructions on leadership and communication in medical students during simulated cardiac arrest. The leadership instruction group demonstrated more leadership utterances compared to the control group (7; IQR, 4-10; vs. 5; IQR, 2-8; P=0.02).

Castelao {Castelao 2011 1338} compared video-based CRM training embedded in an ALS course for final year medical students course versus a control group receiving additional ALS training. They could not show an association between team leader verbalisation of instructions and no flow time.

Castelao {Castelao 2015 116} randomized teams of medical students to CRM teamleader training or additional ALS training. Significantly higher team leader verbalisation proportions were found for the teamleader training group: direct orders (difference -1.82 (95 % CI−2.4,−1.2), P< 0.001); undirected orders (difference −1.82 (95 % CI−2.8,−0.9), P<0.001); planning (difference−0.27 (95 % CI−0.5,−0.05) P=0.018) and task assignments (difference−0.09 (95 % CI −0.2,−0.01), P=0.023.

Haffner {Haffner 2017 7} randomized final-year medical students to receive a 10-min computer-based CRM or a control training on ethics. Communication quality assessed by the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire significantly increased in the intervention group by a mean of 4.5 compared with 2.0 (P= 0.01) in the control group.

We also found very low certainty evidence from three observational studies {Gilfoyle, 2007, e276; Yeung, 2012, 2617; AbdelFattah, 2018, 912} downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision; which showed improved checklist scores and self-reported surveys after CPR team training.

For the important outcome “cognitive knowledge”, we found no evidence.

Treatment Recommendations

We suggest that specific team and leadership training be included as part of Advanced Life Support training for healthcare providers (weak recommendation, very low certainty of evidence).

Justification and Evidence to Decision Framework Highlights

  • Teamwork and leadership are increasingly recognised as important factors contributing to patient safety and outcome in healthcare {Rosen 2018 433}. In the context of advanced life support, which is fundamentally a team effort, the contribution of teamwork and leadership is therefore expected to make a significant contribution to patient outcome. The relevance of this review is further supported by the observations in 1999 by Cooper who reported that leadership during resuscitation is associated with team performance and that, therefore, leadership training should be provided {Cooper 1999 27}.
  • In 2015 the EIT Task Force suggested in its Treatment Recommendation to recommend team and leadership training in ALS courses (weak recommendation based on low-quality evidence). The current review supports that statement also in 2020.
  • Although our current review identified many new studies since the 2015 CoSTR, no RCT addressed the most critical outcome "patient survival". On the other hand, we found three observational studies {Andreatta 2011 33; Neily 2010 1693; Clarke 2013 405} for this critical outcome "patient survival", but they suffer from risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision.
  • In making our recommendation about team and leadership training in ALS courses, we have placed emphasis on the potential benefit, lack of harm, and high level of acceptance of team and leadership training and lesser value on associated costs.
  • In the studies, many different methods to train leadership and team behaviour were reported: through e-learning, video-based training, instruction, demonstration, low fidelity simulation or high fidelity simulation. Team and leadership training may be delivered as an add-on training module to an ALS course, or as an integral part of an ALS course. As such, there was considerable heterogeneity in the studies analysed. The EIT Task Force was of the opinion that integration of team and leadership training in ALS courses may promote its sustainability. In addition to team and leadership training, sufficient exposure to resuscitation may be required in order to achieve improved patient outcome.
  • What is the most effective/efficient method of team and leadership training (e-learning, instruction, demonstration, simulation training, other)?
  • How do team training and leadership training interact and what is their relative importance? Is training of the leader more efficient than training of the team?
  • What is the effect of team and leadership training on patient outcome (there are no RCTs)?
  • How do team/leadership training and provider experience/exposure to resuscitation interact?

Knowledge Gaps

Are there any down sides of leadership training on resuscitation performance (e.g. delay of initiating CPR, stress for leader or the team)

Attachments

Evidence-to-Decision Table: EIT-631 team or leadership training

References

  1. AbdelFattah KR, Spalding MC, Leshikar D, Gardner AK. Team-based simulations for new surgeons: Does early and often make a difference? Surgery. 2018; 163(4): 912-915.
  2. Andreatta P, Saxton E, Thompson M, Annich G. Simulation based mock codes significantly correlate with improved pediatric patient cardiopulmonary arrest survival rates. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011;12(1): 33-38.
  3. Bhanji F, Finn JC, Lockey A, Monsieurs K, Frengley R, Iwami T, Lang E, Ma MH, Mancini ME, McNeil MA, Greif R, Billi JE, Nadkarni VM, Bigham B. Part 8: Education, Implementation, and Teams: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Education, Implementation, and Teams Chapter Collaborators. Circulation. 2015;132:S242-268.
  4. Blackwood J, Duff JP, Nettel-Aguirre A, Djogovic D, Joynt C. Does teaching crisis resource management skills improve resuscitation performance in pediatric residents? Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2014 May;15(4):e168-174.
  5. Cooper S, Wakelam A. Leadership of Resuscitation Teams: "Lighthouse leadership " Resuscitation. 1999;42:27-45).
  6. Chung SP, Cho J, Park YS, Kang HG, Kim CW, Song KJ, Lim H, Cho GC. Effects of script-based role play in cardiopulmonary resuscitation team training. Emerg Med J. 2011;28(8):690-694.
  7. Clarke S, Lyon RM, Short S, Crookston C, Clegg GR. A specialist, second-tier response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: setting up TOPCAT2. Emerg Med J. 2014; 31(5):405-407.
  8. Cooper S. Developing leaders for advanced life support: evaluation of a training programme. Resuscitation. 2001; 49(1): 33-38.
  9. Couper K, Velho RM, Quinn T, Devrell A, Lall R, Orriss B, Yeung J, Perkins GD. Training approaches for the deployment of a mechanical chest compression device: a randomised controlled manikin study. BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 1;8(2):e019009.
  10. DeVita MA, Schaefer J, Lutz J, Wang H, Dongilli T. Improving medical emergency team (MET) performance using a novel curriculum and a computerized human patient simulator. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005; 14(5):326-31.
  11. Fernandez Castelao E, Boos M, Ringer C, Eich C, Russo SG. Effect of CRM team leader training on team performance and leadership behavior in simulated cardiac arrest scenarios: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. BMC Med Educ. 2015 Jul 24;15:116.
  12. Fernandez Castelao E, Russo SG, Cremer S, Strack M, Kaminski L, Eich C, Timmermann A, Boos M. Positive impact of crisis resource management training on no-flow time and team member verbalisations during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomised controlled trial. Resuscitation. 2011;82(10):1338-1343.
  13. Fernandez R, Pearce M, Grand JA, Rench TA, Jones KA, Chao GT, Kozlowski SW. Evaluation of a computer-based educational intervention to improve medical teamwork and performance during simulated patient resuscitations. Crit Care Med. 2013 Nov;41(11):2551-2562.
  14. Finn JC, Bhanji F, Lockey A, Monsieurs K, Frengley R, Iwami T, Lang E, Ma MH, Mancini ME, McNeil MA, Greif R, Billi JE, Nadkarni VM, Bigham B. Part 8: Education, implementation, and teams: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations. Education, Implementation, Teams Chapter Collaborators. Resuscitation. 2015;95:e203-224.
  15. Garbee DD, Paige J, Barrier K, Kozmenko V, Kozmenko L, Zamjahn J, Bonanno L, Cefalu J. Interprofessional teamwork among students in simulated codes: a quasi-experimental study. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2013;34(5): 339-344.
  16. Gilfoyle E, Gottesman R, Razack S. Development of a leadership skills workshop in paediatric advanced resuscitation. Med Teach. 2007; 29(9):e276-83.
  17. Gilfoyle E, Koot DA, Annear JC, Bhanji F, Cheng A, Duff JP, Grant VJ, St George-Hyslop CE, Delaloye NJ, Kotsakis A, McCoy CD, Ramsay CE, Weiss MJ, Gottesman RD; Teams4Kids Investigators and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Improved Clinical Performance and Teamwork of Pediatric Interprofessional Resuscitation Teams With a Simulation-Based Educational Intervention. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2017;18(2):e62-e69.
  18. Haffner L, Mahling M, Muench A, Castan C, Schubert P, Naumann A, Reddersen S, Herrmann-Werner A, Reutershan J, Riessen R, Celebi N. Improved recognition of ineffective chest compressions after a brief Crew Resource Management (CRM) training: a prospective, randomised simulation study. BMC Emerg Med. 2017;17(1):7.
  19. Hunziker S, Bühlmann C, Tschan F, Balestra G, Legeret C, Schumacher C, Semmer NK, Hunziker P, Marsch S. Brief leadership instructions improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a high-fidelity simulation: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2010 Apr;38(4):1086-1091.
  20. Hunziker S, Tschan F, Semmer NK, Zobrist R, Spychiger M, Breuer M, Hunziker PR, Marsch SC. Hands-on time during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is affected by the process of teambuilding: a prospective randomised simulator-based trial. BMC Emerg Med. 2009; 9:3.
  21. Jankouskas TS, Haidet KK, Hupcey JE, Kolanowski A, Murray WB. Targeted crisis resource management training improves performance among randomized nursing and medical students. Simul Health. 2011 Dec;6(6):316-326.
  22. Lorello GR, Hicks CM, Ahmed SA, Unger Z, Chandra D, Hayter MA. Mental practice: a simple tool to enhance team-based trauma resuscitation. CJEM. 2016 Mar;18(2):136-142.
  23. Mäkinen M, Aune S, Niemi-Murola L, Herlitz J, Varpula T, Nurmi J, Axelsson AB, Thorén AB, Castrén M; ECCE Study Group Assessment of CPR-D skills of nurses in Göteborg, Sweden and Espoo, Finland: teaching leadership makes a difference. Resuscitation. 2007;72(2):264-269.
  24. Nadler I, Sanderson PM, Van Dyken CR, Davis PG, Liley HG. Presenting video recordings of newborn resuscitations in debriefings for teamwork training. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(2):163-169.
  25. Neily J, Mills PD, Young-Xu Y, Carney BT, West P, Berger DH, Mazzia LM, Paull DE, Bagian JP. Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical mortality. JAMA. 2010;304(15):1693-1700.
  26. Ong ME, Quah JL, Annathurai A, Noor NM, Koh ZX, Tan KB, Pothiawala S, Poh AH, Loy CK, Fook-Chong S. Improving the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation by training dedicated cardiac arrest teams incorporating a mechanical load-distributing device at the emergency department. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2014;15(9):856-860.
  27. Rosen MA, DiazGranados D, Dietz AS, Benishek LE, Thompson D, Pronovost PJ, Weaver SJ. Teamwork in healthcare: key discoveries enabling safer, high-quality care. Am Psychol. 2018;73(4): 433–450.
  28. Rovamo L, Nurmi E, Mattila MM, Suominen P, Silvennoinen M. Effect of a simulation-based workshop on multidisciplinary teamwork of newborn emergencies: an intervention study. BMC Res Notes. 2015 Nov 12;8: 671.
  29. Semler MW, Keriwala RD, Clune JK, Rice TW, Pugh ME, Wheeler AP, Miller AN, Banerjee A, Terhune K, Bastarache JA. A randomized trial comparing didactics, demonstration, and simulation for teaching teamwork to medical residents. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015;12(4):512-519.
  30. Spitzer CR, Evans K, Buehler J, Ali NA, Besecker BY. Code blue pit crew model: A novel approach to in-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2019;143:158-164.
  31. Su L, Spaeder MC, Jones MB, Sinha P, Nath DS, Jain PN, Berger JT, Williams L, Shankar V. Implementation of an extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation simulation program reduces extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation times in real patients. Resuscitation. 2013;84(4):508-514.
  32. Thomas EJ, Taggart B, Crandell S, Lasky RE, Williams AL, Love LJ, Sexton JB, Tyson JE, Helmreich RL. Teaching teamwork during the Neonatal Resuscitation Program: a randomized trial. J. Perinatol. 2007;27(7):409-14.
  33. Thomas EJ, Williams AL, Reichman EF, Lasky RE, Crandell S, Taggart WR Team training in the neonatal resuscitation program for interns: teamwork and quality of resuscitations. Pediatrics. 2010 Mar;125(3):539-46.
  34. Weidman EK, Bell G, Walsh D, Small S, Edelson DP. Assessing the impact of immersive simulation on clinical performance during actual in-hospital cardiac arrest with CPR-sensing technology: A randomized feasibility study. Resuscitation. 2010;88:1556–1561.
  35. Yeung JH, Ong GJ, Davies RP, Gao F, Perkins GD. Factors affecting team leadership skills and their relationship with quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(9):2617-2621.
Education, Implementation and Teams
Education

Discussion

Sort by

Time range

Categories

Domains

Status

Review Type