Factors influencing the development, recruitment, integration, retention and career development of advanced practice providers in hospital health care teams: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Advanced practice providers (APPs), including physician assistants/associates (PAs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and other non-physician roles, have been developed largely to meet changing healthcare demand and increasing workforce shortages. First introduced in primary care in the US, APPs are prevalent in secondary care across different specialty areas in different countries around the world. In this scoping review, we aimed to summarise the factors influencing the development, recruitment, integration, retention and career development of APP roles in hospital health care teams. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review and searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Global Health, Ovid PsycINFO and EBSCOhost CINAHL to obtain relevant articles published between Jan 2000 and Apr 2023 that focused on workforce management of APP roles in secondary care. Articles were screened by two reviewers independently. Data from included articles were charted and coded iteratively to summarise factors influencing APP development, recruitment, integration, retention and career development across different health system structural levels (macro-, meso- and micro-level). RESULTS: We identified and analysed 273 articles that originated mostly from high-income countries, e.g. the US (n = 115) and the UK (n = 52), and primarily focused on NP (n = 183) and PA (n = 41). At the macro-level, broader workforce supply, national/regional workforce policies such as work-hour restrictions on physicians, APP scope of practice regulations, and views of external collaborators, stakeholders and public representation of APPs influenced organisations' decisions on developing and managing APP roles. At the meso-level, organisational and departmental characteristics, organisational planning, strategy and policy, availability of resources, local experiences and evidence as well as views and perceptions of local organisational leaders, champions and other departments influenced all stages of APP role management. Lastly at the micro-level, individual APPs' backgrounds and characteristics, clinical team members' perceptions, understanding and relationship with APP roles, and patient perceptions and preferences also influenced how APPs are developed, integrated and retained. CONCLUSIONS: We summarised a wide range of factors influencing APP role development and management in secondary care teams. We highlighted the importance for organisations to develop context-specific workforce solutions and strategies with long-term investment, significant resource input and transparent processes to tackle evolving healthcare challenges.

Psychological Safety and Hierarchy in Operating Room Debriefing: Reflexive Thematic Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Debriefing is a team discussion in a constructive, supportive environment. Barriers exist to consistent, effective team debriefing in the clinical setting, especially in operating theaters. The purpose of this study was to gain insights from frontline workers on how to set up an effective debriefing policy for our operating room. METHODS: This was a qualitative study in which we interviewed operating room workers in a tertiary children's hospital. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. Data were analysed using the reflexive thematic analysis technique within a critical realism paradigm. RESULTS: Interviews were analysed from 40 operating room staff: 14 nurses, seven anesthetic technicians, seven anaesthetists, and 12 surgeons; 25 (65%) were female. The three key themes were (1) "commitment to learning"-healthcare workers are committed to teamwork and quality improvement; (2) "it is a safe space"-psychological safety is a prerequisite for, and is enhanced by, debriefing; and (3) "natural leader"-the value of leadership, but also constructs around leadership that maintain hierarchies. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological safety is both a prerequisite for and a product of debriefing. Leadership, if viewed as a collective responsibility, could help break down power structures. Given the results of this study and evidence in the literature, it is likely that routine debriefing, if well done, will improve psychological safety, facilitate team learning, reduce errors, and improve patient safety.

Speech Communication Interference in the Operating Room.

INTRODUCTION: Operating room communication is frequently disrupted, raising safety concerns. We used a Speech Interference Instrument to measure the frequency, impact, and causes of speech communication interference (SCI) events. METHODS: In this prospective study, we observed 40 surgeries, primarily general surgery, to measure the frequency of SCI, defined as "group discourse disrupted according to the participants, the goals, or the physical and situational context of the exchange." We performed supplemental observations, focused on conducting postsurgery interviews with SCI event participants to identify contextual factors. We thematically analyzed notes and interviews. RESULTS: The observed 103 SCI events in 40 surgeries (mean 2.58) mostly involved the attending (50.5%), circulating nurse (44.6%), resident (44.6%), or scrub tech (42.7%). The majority (82.1%) of SCI events occurred during another patient-related task. 17.5% occurred at a critical moment. 27.2% of SCI events were not acknowledged or repeated and the message was lost. Including the supplemental observations, 97.0% of SCI events caused a delay (mean 5 s). Inter-rater reliability, calculated by Gwet's AC1 was 0.87-0.98. Postsurgery interviews confirmed miscommunication and distractions. Attention was most commonly diverted by loud noises (e.g., suction), conversations, or multitasking (e.g., using the electronic health record). Successful strategies included repetition or deferment of the request until competing tasks were complete. CONCLUSIONS: Communication interference may have patient safety implications that arise from conflicts with other case-related tasks, machine noises, and other conversations. Reorganization of workflow, tasks, and communication behaviors could reduce miscommunication and improve surgical safety and efficiency.

Teamwork matters: team situation awareness to build high-performing healthcare teams, a narrative review.

Healthcare today is the prerogative of teams rather than of individuals. In acute care domains such as anaesthesia, intensive care, and emergency medicine, the work is complex and fast-paced, and the team members are diverse and interdependent. Three decades of research into the behaviours of high-performing teams provides us with clear guidance on team training, demonstrating positive effects on patient safety and staff wellbeing. Here we consider team performance through the lens of situation awareness. Maintaining situation awareness is an absolute requirement for safe and effective patient management. Situation awareness is a dynamic process of perceiving cues in the environment, understanding what they mean, and predicting how the situation may evolve. In the context of acute clinical care, situation awareness can be improved if the whole team actively contributes to monitoring the environment, processing information, and planning next steps. In this narrative review, we explore the concept of situation awareness at the level of the team, the conditions required to maintain team situation awareness, and the relationship between team situation awareness, shared mental models, and team performance. Our ultimate goal is to help clinicians create the conditions required for high-functioning teams, and ultimately improve the safety of clinical care.

Social science and teams: a patient perspective.

Teamwork is fundamental for providing high quality care and providing positive experiences for patients. Concepts from organisational behaviour and social science are integrated with a patient perspective to elucidate how various aspects of teams impact on the patient experience. Particular attention is devoted to the team composition, the interaction and communication patterns among team members, how teams are structured, coordination among team members, facilitating a positive team climate, and considering patients as a member of the team.

It's not the arrow, it's the archer: the role of the surgeon leader in a safety driven-era.

BACKGROUND: In an era where team communication and patient safety are paramount, standardized tools have been deemed critical to safe, efficient practice. In some cases-perhaps most notably in the surgical safety checklist (SSC)-these tools have been elevated as the key to safe patient care. However, effects of the SSC on patient safety in practice remain mixed. We explore the role and impact of the surgeon leader in the use of structured communication tools to understand how surgeon engagement impacts intraoperative teamwork. METHODS: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, OR staff members (surgeons, anesthetists, nurses and perfusionists) were recruited to participate in a one-on-one semi-structured interview. The interview explored participant experiences working in the OR, focusing on the role and impact of the surgeon as leader. RESULTS: Engaged use of the surgical safety checklist by the attending surgeon had the potential to improve teamwork in the operating room. Surgeons who used the checklist to engage with their team and facilitate group discussion were able to avoid tensions later in the operation typically arising from lack of situation awareness and familiarity with team member experience levels. Surgeons who engaged with the SSC as more than a memory aid were able to foster a better team environment. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons can harness their role as leader in the operating room by engaging with structured communication tools such as the SSC to foster improved teamwork.

Clinician responses to disruptive intraoperative behaviour: patterns and norms identified from a multinational survey.

PURPOSE: Disruptive intraoperative behaviour can have detrimental consequences for clinicians, institutions, and patients. The way victims and witnesses respond to disruptive behaviour can ameliorate or exacerbate consequences. Nevertheless, previous research has neither described the responses of a multinational sample of clinicians nor developed tools to recognize and evaluate responses. METHODS: After obtaining ethics committee approval, 23 perioperative organizations distributed a survey evaluating clinician responses to disruptive behaviour. We grouped responses into four response strategies: passive, assertive, manipulative, and malicious. Thereafter, we derived norms (i.e., percentile distributions) for each response strategy using empirical distribution functions. Latent profile analysis identified groups of clinicians balancing their use of the four response strategies differently (i.e., response pattern groups). We used Chi square tests to examine associations between response pattern groups and respondent demographics. RESULTS: We analyzed 4,789 complete responses. In response to disruptive behaviour, 33.7% of clinicians altered medical care in ways that were unindicated, 54.6% avoided communication with team members, and 12.1% misled the offender. Profile analysis identified five response pattern groups: extreme passive-predominant (30.5% of clinicians), extreme assertive-predominant (20.5%), moderate passive-predominant (18.9%), moderate assertive-predominant (26.5%), and a disparate pattern (greater use of manipulative and malicious responses) (3.5%). Profession, sex, management responsibilities, and sexual orientation predicted the response pattern group (all, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: The responses of thousands of clinicians involved passivity, manipulativeness, or maliciousness. We present norms and a response pattern classification to help organizations evaluate responses, recognize response patterns, and provide tailored support to victims and witnesses.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les comportements peropératoires perturbateurs ont des effets délétères tant sur l'équipe clinique que sur les institutions et la patientèle. La façon dont les victimes et les témoins réagissent à un comportement perturbateur peut en atténuer ou exacerber les conséquences. Néanmoins, les recherches antérieures n'ont pas décrit les réponses d'un échantillon multinational de clinicien·nes ni développé d'outils pour reconnaître et évaluer les réponses. MéTHODE: Après l'obtention de l'approbation du comité d'éthique, 23 organisations de soins périopératoires ont distribué un sondage évaluant les réponses des cliniciennes et cliniciens aux comportements perturbateurs. Nous avons regroupé les réponses en quatre stratégies de réponse : passive, assertive, manipulatrice et malveillante. Par la suite, nous avons dérivé des normes (c'est-à-dire des distributions centiles) pour chaque stratégie de réponse à l'aide de fonctions de distribution empiriques. L'analyse des profils latents a permis d'identifier des groupes de clinicien·nes équilibrant différemment leur utilisation des quatre stratégies de réponse (c.-à-d. des groupes de modèles de réponse). Nous avons utilisé des tests du chi carré pour examiner les associations entre les groupes de modèles de réponse et les données démographiques des répondant·es. RéSULTATS: Nous avons analysé 4789 réponses complètes. En réponse à un comportement perturbateur, 33,7 % des clinicien·nes ont modifié les soins médicaux d'une manière qui n'était pas indiquée, 54,6 % ont évité de communiquer avec les membres de l'équipe et 12,1 % ont induit la personne délinquante en erreur. L'analyse du profil a permis d'identifier cinq groupes de modèles de réponse : passif extrême-prédominant (30,5 % des clinicien·nes), affirmation de soi extrême-prédominante (20,5 %), passif modéré-prédominant (18,9 %), affirmation de soi modérée-prédominante (26,5 %) et attitudes disparates (utilisation accrue de réponses manipulatrices et malveillantes) (3,5 %). La profession, le sexe, les responsabilités de gestion et l'orientation sexuelle prédisaient le groupe de type de réponse (tous, P < 0,001). DISCUSSION: Les réponses de milliers de clinicien·nes impliquaient la passivité, la manipulation ou la malveillance. Nous présentons des normes et une classification des modèles d'intervention pour aider les organisations à évaluer les réponses, à reconnaître les modèles d'intervention et à fournir un soutien personnalisé aux victimes et aux témoins.

Benefits, implementation and sustainability of innovative paediatric models of care for children with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The evidence about the acceptability and effectiveness of innovative paediatric models of care for Type 1 diabetes is limited. To address this gap, we synthesised literature on implemented models of care, model components, outcomes, and determinants of implementation and sustainability. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Database searches of Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus were conducted. Empirical studies focused on Type 1 diabetes paediatric models of care, published from 2010 to 2022 in English were included. RESULTS: Nineteen extant studies reported on models and their associations with health and psychosocial outcomes, patient engagement with healthcare, and healthcare costs. Thirteen studies described multidisciplinary teamwork, education and capacity building that supported self-care. Four studies involved shared decision making between providers and patients, and two discussed outreach support where technology was an enabler. Fourteen studies reported improvements in health outcomes (e.g. glycaemic control), mostly for models that included multidisciplinary teams, education, and capacity building (11 studies), outreach support or shared care (3 studies). Four studies reported improvements in quality of life, three reported increased satisfaction for patients and carers and, and one reported improved communication. Four of five studies describing shared care and decision-making reported improvements in quality of life, support and motivation. Outreach models reported no negative outcomes, however, accessing some models was limited by technological and cost barriers. Eight studies reported on model sustainability, but only half reported implementation determinants; none reported applying a theoretical framework to guide their research. CONCLUSION: Some health and psychosocial benefits were associated with newer models. To address knowledge gaps about implementation determinants and model sustainability, longitudinal studies are needed to inform future adoption of innovative models of care for children with Type 1 diabetes.

Enhancing interprofessional collaboration in paediatric training: Insights from profession-specific experiences and implications for future education.

AIM: There is limited evidence on trainees' and instructors' needs and perspectives concerning interprofessional simulation-based trainings. We aimed to study task distribution among team members, profession-specific learning effects and enhancing collaboration and competencies within medical teams. METHODS: This prospective study examined expectations and experiences of medical and nursing students during paediatric emergency training in a tertiary care centre with questionnaires before and after a training. Further, expert interviews were conducted to identify the needs for interprofessional training. Results were used to design a standardised checklist for structured preparation of interprofessional paediatric emergency management training. RESULTS: Of the nursing students, 82% initially intended to assume the role of the team leader, but only 5.8% did so during training. Both professions emphasised the significance of effective communication and transparent task distribution for successful collaboration. Experts highlighted the importance of proficiency in basic technical skills and identified non-technical skills such as closed-loop communication and the 10-4-10 principle as crucial for both professions. CONCLUSION: The study revealed profession-specific variations in the intention of acquiring the team leader or member role. Interprofessional training emerges as a potential strategy to dismantle these structures and promote shared responsibilities. The checklist aims to facilitate structured preparation of a training.

Behavioral sciences applied to acute care teams: a research agenda for the years ahead by a European research network.

BACKGROUND: Multi-disciplinary behavioral research on acute care teams has focused on understanding how teams work and on identifying behaviors characteristic of efficient and effective team performance. We aimed to define important knowledge gaps and establish a research agenda for the years ahead of prioritized research questions in this field of applied health research. METHODS: In the first step, high-priority research questions were generated by a small highly specialized group of 29 experts in the field, recruited from the multinational and multidisciplinary "Behavioral Sciences applied to Acute care teams and Surgery (BSAS)" research network - a cross-European, interdisciplinary network of researchers from social sciences as well as from the medical field committed to understanding the role of behavioral sciences in the context of acute care teams. A consolidated list of 59 research questions was established. In the second step, 19 experts attending the 2020 BSAS annual conference quantitatively rated the importance of each research question based on four criteria - usefulness, answerability, effectiveness, and translation into practice. In the third step, during half a day of the BSAS conference, the same group of 19 experts discussed the prioritization of the research questions in three online focus group meetings and established recommendations. RESULTS: Research priorities identified were categorized into six topics: (1) interventions to improve team process; (2) dealing with and implementing new technologies; (3) understanding and measuring team processes; (4) organizational aspects impacting teamwork; (5) training and health professions education; and (6) organizational and patient safety culture in the healthcare domain. Experts rated the first three topics as particularly relevant in terms of research priorities; the focus groups identified specific research needs within each topic. CONCLUSIONS: Based on research priorities within the BSAS community and the broader field of applied health sciences identified through this work, we advocate for the prioritization for funding in these areas.