GROUP

Is this an Evidence Based Article? Name of Journal and Year article was written?

Yes

Name of Journal: A qualitative study of nurses’ and physicians’ experiences with teamwork skills

Year: 2019

.2 points

State the problem

What was the goal of the project in the article?

Does this project correlate with your problem? State how?

What are you trying to achieve? Does this article support this goal?

Problem: There is uncertainty in determining the impact of teamwork and interprofessional team training in enhancing continuity in provision of high-quality care in a complex medical setting such as surgical procedures and ward.

Goal: The study aims at describing healthcare professionals’ experiences with teamwork during surgical process following an implementation of longitudinal interprofessional team training programmer.

State how this article correlates with your group problem and goal. The article focuses on the impact of teamwork in complex clinical settings or backgrounds. This aligns with the group problem which is enhancing teamwork between the registered nurses and patient care techs. In both cases, there is analysis of teamwork and the impact it has in ensuring there is provision of high-quality care in complex medical units such as surgical units.

.2 points

Strengths (Internal)

What’s was good about your article?

Why was this project successful? The project was very successful in the approach used in collecting data from the participants of the study. There were three distinct stages to the analysis process: planning, execution, and reporting. The first two stages were conducted by RB and AV with help from KA, and the third stage was conducted by all three authors. During the pre-analysis phase, we treated each interview as a discrete unit of analysis and examined information from Time Points Zero, One, and Two independently. Each interview was read by all three authors multiple times to ensure familiarity with the data, and using the objectives and questions, the researchers learned extensive details about the participants' experiences with teamwork.

Effective planning of the project: In the planning stage, the authors set up a structured analysis matrix with columns for the many aspects of organization, including communication, leadership, situation monitoring, and mutual assistance.

.4 points

Weakness (Internal)- issues

Limited scope of study: The project focused at healthcare providers within the surgical unit during the first encounter. Even after recognizing the potential changes after receiving feedback, there was no study conducted to determine the impact of feedback received following the study.

Bias: The small study size and potential bias in the sample due to participants' preconceived notions of teamwork on the surgical ward could also skew the results. The findings cannot be generalized, but thanks to the qualitative nature of the study, there is a better grasp on how health workers' experiences with newly acquired collaboration abilities have played out in practice, which may have implications for other hospital wards. The results may have been impacted by the fact that the interview times were frequently changed by the healthcare providers due to time constraints and busyness on the surgical ward. After 6 months, two sets of attending physician took part in the interviews, but after 12 months, just one physician took part.

.4 points

Opportunities (External)

There is a need to conduct further study in determining the impact of feedback among team members. This is evident as the study identifies changes in performance of healthcare providers following reception of feedback. There was a heightened awareness of feedback among both RNs and CNAs. When unfavorable occurrences occurred, they found the tools helpful, and they received lots of encouragement from the entire interdisciplinary team. Nurses saw a decline in the 'go to the leader' approach when employees were dissatisfied, and they heard less complaints from coworkers who wanted to voice their concerns. The nurses had also witnessed newer nurses who were willing to advocate for their patients. But they also believed that healthcare professionals were cagey at times, suggesting there was always space for development in the two-way exchange of opinions.

Expansion of scope: There is a need to explore more options in choosing appropriate participants for the study before coming up with the final solutions and recommendations in relation to the use of teamwork in enhancing success and realization of outcomes.

.4 points

Threats - (External)

Threat of confirmation bias: With the narrow scope of study and participants relied on the study, there is higher chances of inappropriate conclusion made from the findings.

Validity: The study project involved limited number of participants which in turn presents a potential cause of inconsistency if a different set of participants were used in the study. Because majority of the nursing staff attended the refresher courses, the outcomes may have been different if a wider number of physicians had participated. Patient safety efforts, such as the Medical Emergency Warning System (MEWS) and patient safety whiteboard meetings, recently implemented in the ward in anticipation of the team training programme may also have influenced the results.

.4 points