Norwegian trauma team leaders--training and experience: a national point prevalence study

Trauma Team Activation: Which Surgical Capability Is Immediately Required in Polytrauma? A Retrospective, Monocentric Analysis of Emergency Procedures Performed on 751 Severely Injured Patients

There has been an ongoing discussion as to which interventions should be carried out by an “organ specialist” (for example, a thoracic or visceral surgeon) or by a trauma surgeon with appropriate general surgical training in polytrauma patients. However, there are only limited data about which exact emergency interventions are immediately carried out. This retrospective data analysis of one Level 1 trauma center includes adult polytrauma patients, as defined according to the Berlin definition. The primary outcome was the four most common emergency surgical interventions (ESI) performed during primary resuscitation. Out of 1116 patients, 751 (67.3%) patients (male gender, 530, 74.3%) met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 39 years (IQR: 25, 58) and the median injury severity score (ISS) was 38 (IQR: 29, 45). In total, 711 (94.7%) patients had at least one ESI. The four most common ESI were the insertion of a chest tube (48%), emergency laparotomy (26.3%), external fixation (23.5%), and the insertion of an intracranial pressure probe (ICP) (19.3%). The initial emergency treatment of polytrauma patients include a limited spectrum of potential life-saving interventions across distinct body regions. Polytrauma care would benefit from the 24/7 availability of a trauma team able to perform basic potentially life-saving surgical interventions, including chest tube insertion, emergency laparotomy, placing external fixators, and ICP insertion.

Training residents to lead emergency teams: A qualitative review of barriers, challenges and learning goals

OBJECTIVE

An investigation to determine any consensus in opinions and views in the literature about challenges or barriers in training leadership for emergencies.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Leadership in emergencies is reported as being very important for patient outcome. A systematic review failed in 2016 to find any focused leadership training. In the literature, the research has described and focused on developing tools to evaluate leadership.

METHOD

Articles identified in the systematic review combined with other reviews and opinions were included to incorporate experiences, perceptions and emotions connected with leadership training in emergency situations. Two qualitative content analyses were conducted. The first analysis searched for opinions about leadership and leadership training in emergencies. The method was abductive - inductive qualitative content analysis. The second analysis searched, on the basis of an article written in 1986, statements about challenges regarding leadership training in all articles. This method was directed qualitative content analysis.

FINDINGS

In total 40 articles covering the years 1986-2016 were analysed. An explicit need for workable leadership training of team leaders in emergencies was identified. The importance of the teamleader in emergencies was repeatedly stressed by 31/40 articles, leadership training is needed or required was stated by 30/40 articles, 27/40 articles described the emergency situation as stressful, complex, chaotic or unpredictable, 17/40 described the importance of self-confidence by the teamleader, and 8/40 described that the situation was perceived as creating concern, anxiety or panic.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature recommends finding a solution to teach residents to gain courage and confidence in stressful surroundings. The literature recommends finding a way to work with body language, non-verbal communication, attitude and appearance in order to radiate credibility in a setting separated from medical knowledge.

A search for training of practising leadership in emergency medicine: A systematic review

Objective

This systematic review examines the medical, psychological and educational literature for training in practising leadership of a team leader in emergencies. The objectives of this paper are (1) describe how literature addresses operational training in practising leadership for the emergency medical team-leader (2) enhance understanding of leadership training in the medical environment.

Background

Worldwide, medical supervisors find it difficult to get students to rise to the occasion as leaders of emergency teams. It appears that many residents feel unprepared to adopt the role as a leader in emergencies.

Method

A systematic review was conducted (May-December 2016) in accordance with the PRISMA 2009 Checklist. A literature search was conducted against a set of inclusion criteria. Databases searched included PubMed, Psycinfo (via Ovid), and ERIC.

Results

27 articles covering the period 1986-2016 were analysed. Four sources of data were identified: Intervention studies practising leadership, intervention studies on simulation and leadership assessment, observation studies assessing leadership, interview/survey studies about the need for leadership training. No workable training in practising leadership in emergencies for doctors was found. The majority of the research projects focused on various different types of taxonomies.

Conclusions

No consistent and workable leadership training for the emergency medical teamleader was identified. One study for paramedics succeeded in training empowering leadership skills. For many years multiple taxonomies and leadership assessment tools have been developed but failed to come to terms with workable leadership training. The literature describes lack of leadership as highly detrimental to performance during a critical, clinical situation.

Conducting the emergency team: A novel way to train the team-leader for emergencies

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, medical supervisors find it difficult to get students to rise to the occasion when called upon to act as leaders of emergency teams: many residents/rescuers feel unprepared to adopt the leadership role. The challenge is to address the residents very strong emotions caused by the extremely stressful context. No systematic leadership training takes this aspect into account.

AIM

The overall aim of the course is to investigate whether, in an emergency, a clinical team leader could apply a conductor's leadership skills.

BACKGROUND

An orchestral conductor is a specialist in practicing leadership focusing on non-verbal communication. The conductor works with highly trained specialists and must lead them to cooperate and put his interpretation into effect. The conductor works purposefully in order to appear calm, genuine and gain authority.

METHOD

A conductor and a consultant prepared a course for residents, medical students and nurses, n = 61. Ten × two course days were completed. The exercises were musical and thus safe for the students as there were no clinical skills at stake. The programme aimed to create stress and anxiety in a safe learning environment.

CONCLUSION

The transfer of a conductor's skills improved and profoundly changed the participating students', nurses' and residents' behaviour and introduced a method to handle anxiety and show calmness and authority.

PERSPECTIVES

If this course in leadership is to be introduced as a compulsory part of the educating of doctors, the ideal time would be after clinical skills have been acquired, experience gained and routines understood in the clinic.

Cross-cultural validation and psychometric testing of the Norwegian version of the TeamSTEPPS® teamwork perceptions questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Teamwork is an integrated part of today's specialized and complex healthcare and essential to patient safety, and is considered as a core competency to improve twenty-first century healthcare. Teamwork measurements and evaluations show promising results to promote good team performance, and are recommended for identifying areas for improvement. The validated TeamSTEPPS® Teamwork Perception Questionnaire (T-TPQ) was found suitable for cross-cultural validation and testing in a Norwegian context. T-TPQ is a self-report survey that examines five dimensions of perception of teamwork within healthcare settings. The aim of the study was to translate and cross-validate the T-TPQ into Norwegian, and test the questionnaire for psychometric properties among healthcare personnel.

METHODS

The T-TPQ was translated and adapted to a Norwegian context according to a model of a back-translation process. A total of 247 healthcare personnel representing different professionals and hospital settings responded to the questionnaire. A confirmatory factor analysis was carried out to test the factor structure. Cronbach's alpha was used to establish internal consistency, and an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient was used to assess the test - retest reliability.

RESULT

A confirmatory factor analysis showed an acceptable fitting model (χ² (df) 969.46 (546), p < 0.001, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.056, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.88, Comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.89, which indicates that each set of the items that was supposed to accompany each teamwork dimension clearly represents that specific construct. The Cronbach's alpha demonstrated acceptable values on the five subscales (0.786-0.844), and test-retest showed a reliability parameter, with Intraclass Correlation Coefficient scores from 0.672 to 0.852.

CONCLUSION

The Norwegian version of T-TPQ was considered to be acceptable regarding the validity and reliability for measuring Norwegian individual healthcare personnel's perception of group level teamwork within their unit. However, it needs to be further tested, preferably in a larger sample and in different clinical settings.

Norwegian trauma care: a national cross-sectional survey of all hospitals involved in the management of major trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Approximately 10% of the Norwegian population is injured every year, with injuries ranging from minor injuries treated by general practitioners to major and complex injuries requiring specialist in-hospital care. There is a lack of knowledge concerning the caseload of potentially severely injured patients in Norwegian hospitals. Aim of the study was to describe the current status of the Norwegian trauma system by identifying the number and the distribution of contributing hospitals and the caseload of potentially severely injured trauma patients within these hospitals.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey with a structured questionnaire was sent in the summer of 2012 to all Norwegian hospitals that receive trauma patients. These were defined by number of trauma team activations in the included hospitals. A literature review was performed to assess over time the development of hospitals receiving trauma patients.

RESULTS

Forty-one hospitals responded and were included in the study. In 2011, four trauma centres and 37 acute care hospitals received a total of 6,570 trauma patients. Trauma centres received 2,175 (33%) patients and other hospitals received 4,395 (67%) patients. There were significant regional differences between health care regions in the distribution of trauma patients between trauma centres and acute care hospitals. More than half (52.5%) of the hospitals received fewer than 100 patients annually. The national rate of hospital admission via trauma teams was 13 per 10,000 inhabitants. There was a 37% (from 65 to 41) reduction in the number of hospitals receiving trauma patients between 1988 and 2011.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2011, hospital acute trauma care in Norway was delivered by four trauma centres and 37 acute care hospitals. Many hospitals still receive a small number of potentially severely injured patients and only a few hospitals have an electronic trauma registry. Future development of the Norwegian trauma system needs to address the challenge posed by a scattered population and long geographical distances. The implementation of a trauma system, carefully balanced between centres with adequate caseloads against time from injury to hospital care, is needed and has been shown to have a beneficial effect in countries with comparable challenges.

PHTLS ® (Prehospital Trauma Life Support) provider courses in Germany - who takes part and what do participants think about prehospital trauma care training?

Background

The goal of this study was to examine PHTLS Provider courses in Germany and to proof the assumption that formation of physicians and paramedics in prehospital trauma care can be optimized.

Methods

PHTLS participants were asked to fill out standardized questionnaires during their course preparation and directly after the course. There were some open questions regarding their professional background and closed questions concerning PHTLS itself. Further questions were to be answered on an analog scale in order to quantify subjective impressions of confidence, knowledge and also to describe individual levels of education and training.

Results

247 questionnaires could be analyzed. Physicians noted significant (p < 0.001) more deficits in their professional training than paramedics. 80% of the paramedics affirmed to have had adequate training with respect to prehospital trauma care, all physicians claimed not to have had sufficient training for prehospital trauma care situations at Medical School. Physicians were statistically most significant dissatisfied then paramedics (p < 0.001). While most participants gave positive feedback, anesthetists were less convinced of PHTLS (p = 0.005), didn’t benefit as much as the rest (p = 0.004) and stated more often, that the course was of less value for their daily work (p = 0.03). After the course confidence increased remarkably and reached higher rates than before the course (p < 0.001). After PHTLS both groups showed similar ratings concerning the course concept indicating that PHTLS could equalize some training deficits and help to gain confidence and assurance in prehospital trauma situations. 90% of the paramedics and 100% of the physicians would recommend PHTLS. Physicians and especially anesthetists revised their opinions with regard to providing PHTLS at Medical School after having taken part in a PHTLS course.

Conclusion

The evaluation of PHTLS courses in Germany indicates the necessity for special prehospital trauma care training. Paramedics and physicians criticize deficits in their professional training, which can be compensated by PHTLS. With respect to relevant items like confidence and knowledge PHTLS leads to a statistically significant increase in ratings on a visual analogue scale. PHTLS should be integrated into the curriculum at Medical School.

What is optimal timing for trauma team alerts? A retrospective observational study of alert timing effects on the initial management of trauma patients

Background

Trauma teams improve the initial management of trauma patients. Optimal timing of trauma alerts could improve team preparedness and performance while also limiting adverse ripple effects throughout the hospital. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how timing of trauma team activation and notification affects initial in-hospital management of trauma patients.

Methods

Data from a single hospital trauma care quality registry were matched with data from a trauma team alert log. The time from patient arrival to chest X-ray, and the emergency department length of stay were compared with the timing of trauma team activations and whether or not trauma team members received a preactivation notification.

Results

In 2009, the trauma team was activated 352 times; 269 times met the inclusion criteria. There were statistically significant differences in time to chest X-ray for differently timed trauma team activations (P = 0.003). Median time to chest X-ray for teams activated 15–20 minutes prearrival was 5 minutes, and 8 minutes for teams activated <5 minutes before patient arrival. Timing had no effect on length of stay in the emergency department (P = 0.694). We found no effect of preactivation notification on time to chest X-ray (P = 0.474) or length of stay (P = 0.684).

Conclusion

Proactive trauma team activation improved the initial management of trauma patients. Trauma teams should be activated prior to patient arrival.