Team strategies and tools to enhance performance and patient safety training: The effect of training on both nursing staff perceptions regarding physician behaviors and patient satisfaction scores in the ED
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Background: Program used to enhance teamwork and communication among health professionals to improve patient safety and employee satisfaction. Objective: We hypothesized that Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) training would improve communication between physicians and nurses and between physicians and their patients and family members, and that it would improve patient perceptions of emergency department teamwork.Methods: Design: Before and after prospective observational study. Setting: Tertiary Care Hospital Emergency Department. Participants/Subjects: Twelve core physicians and 43 nurses underwent two, 4-hour TeamSTEPPS training sessions in July 2011 and July 2012. The first session consisted of didactic instruction using the TeamSTEPPS material. The second session was comprised of simulations focusing on the content of the initial training course. Nurses were asked to rate individual physicians on five distinct aspects of communication, both before and after the training sessions. Statistical Methods: Survey results were compared using theWilcoxon signed rank test. Patient satisfaction survey questions regarding teamwork (4th Quarters 2010 and 2011) were analyzed using two-sample t-tests.Results: TeamSTEPPS improved nurse’s perception regarding physician communication with patients and their families (post: 4.28 ± 0.37 vs. pre: 4.16 ± 0.42, p = .0479), with a trend towards improvement in nurse’s perception of physician’s communication with nursing staff regarding changes in patient care plans (post: 3.94 ± 0.38 vs. pre: 3.81 ± 0.5, p = .0942). TeamSTEPPS was also associated with a significant improvement in patient’s rating of teamwork between doctors and nurses as “excellent” (post: 62.9% vs. pre: 48.3%, p = .0132).Conclusions: Team training with the TeamSTEPPS program improved selected aspects of nursing and patient perceptions of teamwork and communication between emergency department physicians and nurses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".