RESUMO
Objectives: Emergency department (ED) teams frequently perform under conditions of high stress. Stress exposure simulation (SES) is specifically designed to train recognition and management of stress responses under these conditions. Current approaches to design and delivery of SES in emergency medicine are based on principles derived from other contexts and from anecdotal experience. However, the optimal design and delivery of SES in emergency medicine are not known. We aimed to explore participant experience to inform our approach. Methods: We performed an exploratory study in our Australian ED with doctors and nurses participating in SES sessions. We used a three-part framework-sources of stress, the impacts of that stress, and the strategies to mitigate-to inform our SES design and delivery and to guide our exploration of participant experience. Data were collected through a narrative survey and participant interviews and analyzed thematically. Results: There were 23 total participants (doctors n = 12, nurses n = 11) across the three sessions. Sixteen survey responses and eight interview transcripts were analyzed, each with equal numbers of doctors and nurses. Five themes were identified in data analysis: (1) experience of stress, (2) managing stress, (3) design and delivery of SES, (4) learning conversations, and (5) transfer to practice. Conclusions: We suggest that design and delivery of SES should follow health care simulation best practice, with stress adequately induced by authentic clinical scenarios and to avoid trickery or adding extraneous cognitive load. Facilitators leading learning conversations in SES sessions should develop a deep understanding of stress and emotional activation and focus on team-based strategies to mitigate harmful impacts of stress on performance.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Team culture underpins team performance. Psychological safety - 'a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking' - is a critical component of team culture for high-performing teams across contexts. However, psychological safety in ED teams has not been well explored. We aimed to explore this core teamwork concept in the ED. METHODS: This was a sequential mixed-methods study of nursing and medical staff at a large tertiary care ED in Australia from October 2020 to March 2021. First, participants completed the 'Team Learning and Psychological Safety Survey' and a narrative questionnaire. These findings informed semi-structured interviews. We determined median psychological safety and compared results across role and length of time working in the department. Qualitative results were analysed using a deductive thematic analysis using a previously generated framework for enablers of psychological safety at the individual, team and organisational levels. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 72/410 participants and 19 interviews were conducted. The median psychological safety score was 37/49 (IQR 13). Psychological safety was not experienced universally, with nurses and new staff experiencing lower levels. Individual, team and organisational factors impacted psychological safety. The primary force shaping psychological safety was familiarity with colleagues and leaders. CONCLUSION: Familiarity of team members and leaders was critical to the development of psychological safety within the ED. Fostering familiarity should be a focus for frontline leadership each shift and a priority in broader departmental decisions for those seeking to enhance the psychological safety of their teams.
Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente , Humanos , AustráliaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Simulation facilitators strive to ensure the psychological safety of participants during simulation events; however, we have limited understanding of how antecedent levels of psychological safety impact the simulation experience or how the simulation experience impacts real-world psychological safety. METHODS: We explored the experience of participants in an embedded, interprofessional simulation program at a large tertiary emergency department (ED) in Australia. We engaged in theoretical thematic analysis of sequential narrative surveys and semi-structured interviews using a previously derived framework of enablers of psychological safety in healthcare. We sought to understand (1) how real-world psychological safety impacts the simulation experience and (2) how the simulation experience influences real-world psychological safety. RESULTS: We received 74 narrative responses and conducted 19 interviews. Simulation experience was both influenced by and impacted psychological safety experienced at the individual, team, and organizational levels of ED practice. Most strikingly, simulation seemed to be an incubator of team familiarity with direct impact on real-world practice. We present a model of the bidirectional impact of psychological safety and simulation within healthcare environments. CONCLUSION: Our model represents both opportunity and risk for facilitators and organizations engaging in simulation. It should inform objectives, design, delivery, debriefing, and faculty development and firmly support the situation of simulation programs within the broader cultural ethos and goals of the departments and organizations.
