Suppr超能文献

临床评估作为团队合作有效性衡量标准的准确性。

The accuracy of clinical assessments as a measure for teamwork effectiveness.

机构信息

School of ITEE, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

出版信息

Simul Healthc. 2011 Oct;6(5):260-8. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e31821eaa38.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Team training in healthcare is usually evaluated by observers who either score trainees' behaviors, social skills, and cognitive skills during simulation or measure changes in the clinical state of a mannequin. Both methods have shortcomings that limit their usefulness. We propose Brunswik's probabilistic functionalism and the Accuracy Score (AS), a measure emerging from judgment analysis, as elements of a complementary approach that could increase the objectivity of team training evaluation. We report an initial investigation.

METHOD

Three groups of neonatal clinicians participated in a resuscitation experiment involving three different training interventions. During the experiment, at various phases, the participants were required to assign an Apgar score to a mannequin.

ANALYSIS

The AS was used to test how accurately the clinicians assigned Apgar scores to the mannequin across different levels of task demand, training content, and training delivery method.

RESULTS

The AS was lower when task demand increased (P < 0.01). The AS was higher after teamwork training than after clinical training (P < 0.05) and better after hands-on teamwork training than after lecture-based teamwork training (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Because it is simple and objective, the AS may complement existing measures for team training evaluation. Future studies are required in which the AS is tested with a larger number of trainees, in longitudinal experiments, across different training areas, and is compared with previously validated team performance measures.

摘要

简介

医疗团队培训通常由观察者进行评估,他们要么在模拟过程中对学员的行为、社交技能和认知技能进行评分,要么测量模拟人临床状态的变化。这两种方法都有其局限性,限制了它们的有用性。我们提出 Brunswik 的概率功能主义和准确度评分(AS)作为一种互补方法的要素,该方法可以提高团队培训评估的客观性。我们报告了一项初步调查。

方法

三组新生儿临床医生参与了一项复苏实验,涉及三种不同的培训干预措施。在实验过程中,参与者需要在不同阶段为模拟人分配 Apgar 评分。

分析

使用 AS 来测试临床医生在不同任务需求、培训内容和培训交付方法下,对模拟人分配 Apgar 评分的准确性。

结果

任务需求增加时,AS 降低(P < 0.01)。与临床培训相比,团队培训后 AS 更高(P < 0.05),实践型团队培训后 AS 高于讲座型团队培训后 AS(P < 0.05)。

结论

由于 AS 简单客观,因此它可能是团队培训评估的现有方法的补充。需要进一步研究,在更大数量的学员中,在纵向实验中,在不同的培训领域中,以及与以前验证过的团队绩效衡量标准进行比较,来测试 AS。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验