Assessing Team Performance: A Mixed-Methods Analysis Using Interprofessional in situ Simulation

Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessme...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe western journal of emergency medicine Vol. 25; no. 4; pp. 557 - 564
Main Authors Rider, Ashley C, Williams, Sarah R, Jones, Vivien, Rebagliati, Daniel, Schertzer, Kimberly, Gisondi, Michael A, Sebok-Syer, Stefanie S
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 01.07.2024
eScholarship Publishing, University of California
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams. This mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2-4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, (TEAM), and (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Eighteen team-based simulations took place between January-April 2021. Raters' scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance. Current team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual's contribution to a team's performance.
AbstractList Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams.IntroductionOptimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams.This mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2-4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the Team Performance Observation Tool (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), and Ottawa Crisis Resource Management Global Rating Scale (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.MethodsThis mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2-4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the Team Performance Observation Tool (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), and Ottawa Crisis Resource Management Global Rating Scale (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.Eighteen team-based simulations took place between January-April 2021. Raters' scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance.ResultsEighteen team-based simulations took place between January-April 2021. Raters' scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance.Current team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual's contribution to a team's performance.ConclusionCurrent team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual's contribution to a team's performance.
Introduction: Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams. Methods: This mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2–4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the Team Performance Observation Tool (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), and Ottawa Crisis Resource Management Global Rating Scale (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Eighteen team-based simulations took place between January–April 2021. Raters’ scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance. Conclusion: Current team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual’s contribution to a team’s performance.
Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams. This mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2-4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, (TEAM), and (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Eighteen team-based simulations took place between January-April 2021. Raters' scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance. Current team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual's contribution to a team's performance.
Introduction: Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to comprehensively measure this impact is underexplored. In this study we aimed to 1) evaluate ED team performance using current team-based assessment tools during an interprofessional in situ simulation and 2) identify characteristics of effective ED teams. Methods: This mixed-methods study employed case study methodology based on a constructivist paradigm. Sixty-three eligible nurses, technicians, pharmacists, and postgraduate year 2–4 emergency medicine residents at a tertiary academic ED participated in a 10-minute in situ simulation of a critically ill patient. Participants self-rated performance using the Team Performance Observation Tool (TPOT) 2.0 and completed a brief demographic form. Two raters independently reviewed simulation videos and rated performance using the TPOT 2.0, Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), and Ottawa Crisis Resource Management Global Rating Scale (Ottawa GRS). Following simulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with in situ participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Eighteen team-based simulations took place between January–April 2021. Raters’ scores were on the upper end of the tools for the TPOT 2.0 (R1 4.90, SD 0.17; R2 4.53, SD 0.27, IRR [inter-rater reliability] 0.47), TEAM (R1 3.89, SD 0.19; R2 3.58, SD 0.39, IRR 0.73), and Ottawa GRS (R1 6.6, SD 0.56; R2 6.2, SD 0.54, IRR 0.68). We identified six themes from our interview data: team member entrustment; interdependent energy; leadership tone; optimal communication; strategic staffing; and simulation empowering team performance. Conclusion: Current team performance assessment tools insufficiently discriminate among high performing teams in the ED. Emergency department-specific assessments that capture features of entrustability, interdependent energy, and leadership tone may offer a more comprehensive way to assess an individual’s contribution to a team’s performance.
Author Sebok-Syer, Stefanie S
Rider, Ashley C
Jones, Vivien
Gisondi, Michael A
Williams, Sarah R
Schertzer, Kimberly
Rebagliati, Daniel
AuthorAffiliation Albany Medical College, Albany, New York
Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland
AuthorAffiliation_xml – name: Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
– name: Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland
– name: Albany Medical College, Albany, New York
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Ashley C
  surname: Rider
  fullname: Rider, Ashley C
  organization: Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Sarah R
  surname: Williams
  fullname: Williams, Sarah R
  organization: Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Vivien
  surname: Jones
  fullname: Jones, Vivien
  organization: Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Daniel
  surname: Rebagliati
  fullname: Rebagliati, Daniel
  organization: Albany Medical College, Albany, New York
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Kimberly
  surname: Schertzer
  fullname: Schertzer, Kimberly
  organization: Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Michael A
  surname: Gisondi
  fullname: Gisondi, Michael A
  organization: Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Stefanie S
  surname: Sebok-Syer
  fullname: Sebok-Syer, Stefanie S
  organization: Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39028241$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNpVkc1vEzEQxS1URNvAkSvykcu2_ljv2lxQVAUa1AikpuJoee3Z1NGuHexdoP89m6RU7cVjvXnzG8vvHJ2EGACh95RcCEnp5R_Iwxb6CyoJZa_QGVW8KhSh8uTZ_RSd57wlRIiaizfolCvCJCvpGdLznCFnHzZ4DabHPyC1MfUmWPiE53jl_4IrVjDcR5fxPJjuIfuM7w4DyzBA2qXY7gFx6mEfcPbDiG99P3ZmmMS36HVrugzvHusM3X1ZrK-ui5vvX5dX85vCMiFY0fDGUjudrSGlI5Q0UjJla6Vs1TInSC1V6dqaydZaVhMBpKbUlWpSm8pxPkPLI9dFs9W75HuTHnQ0Xh-EmDbapMHbDnRprGuFIpJyUtZGKaPqiW9KBsqaZs_6fGTtxqYHZyEMyXQvoC87wd_rTfytKWWipNMfz9DHR0KKv8YpId37bKHrTIA4Zs2JZBWTFWeTtThabYo5J2if9lCi9wnrn4vb9bfFSh8Snvwfnj_uyf0_Uv4PFp2lQQ
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2024 Rider et al. 2024
Copyright_xml – notice: 2024 Rider et al. 2024
DBID CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
AAYXX
CITATION
7X8
5PM
DOA
DOI 10.5811/westjem.18012
DatabaseName Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
CrossRef
MEDLINE - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
Directory of Open Access Journals
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
CrossRef
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE - Academic
CrossRef
MEDLINE

Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: DOA
  name: Directory of Open Access Journals
  url: https://www.doaj.org/
  sourceTypes: Open Website
– sequence: 2
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 3
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Public Health
DocumentTitleAlternate Mixed-Methods Analysis Using Interprofessional in situ Simulation
EISSN 1936-9018
EndPage 564
ExternalDocumentID oai_doaj_org_article_4acdf590813047a99a97078a42e9cab3
10_5811_WESTJEM_18012
39028241
Genre Journal Article
GroupedDBID 04C
123
29R
2WC
53G
5VS
7RV
7X7
8FI
8FJ
AAWTL
ABDBF
ABUWG
ADBBV
ADRAZ
AFKRA
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AOIJS
AUK
BAWUL
BCNDV
BENPR
BKEYQ
BMSDO
BPHCQ
BVXVI
CCPQU
CGR
CUY
CVF
DIK
E3Z
EBD
EBS
ECM
EIF
EIHBH
EJD
F5P
FYUFA
GROUPED_DOAJ
GX1
HMCUK
HYE
IPNFZ
KQ8
M48
M~E
NAPCQ
NPM
O5R
O5S
OK1
PGMZT
PIMPY
PQQKQ
PROAC
RIG
RNS
RPM
TR2
UKHRP
AAYXX
CITATION
7X8
5PM
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c2552-b3bc1cb3bfa04d010b8829c799c6f2d507894df728fcc2705e0711d4994db6d33
IEDL.DBID RPM
ISSN 1936-9018
1936-900X
IngestDate Tue Oct 22 14:59:19 EDT 2024
Tue Sep 17 21:28:26 EDT 2024
Sat Oct 26 04:35:32 EDT 2024
Fri Aug 23 04:39:45 EDT 2024
Sat Nov 02 12:10:43 EDT 2024
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 4
Language English
License This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c2552-b3bc1cb3bfa04d010b8829c799c6f2d507894df728fcc2705e0711d4994db6d33
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
OpenAccessLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11254157/
PMID 39028241
PQID 3082628632
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 8
ParticipantIDs doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_4acdf590813047a99a97078a42e9cab3
pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11254157
proquest_miscellaneous_3082628632
crossref_primary_10_5811_WESTJEM_18012
pubmed_primary_39028241
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2024-Jul
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2024-07-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 07
  year: 2024
  text: 2024-Jul
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle The western journal of emergency medicine
PublicationTitleAlternate West J Emerg Med
PublicationYear 2024
Publisher Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
eScholarship Publishing, University of California
Publisher_xml – name: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
– name: eScholarship Publishing, University of California
SSID ssj0055735
Score 2.3480833
Snippet Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment tools to...
Introduction: Optimizing the performance of emergency department (ED) teams impacts patient care, but the utility of current, team-based performance assessment...
SourceID doaj
pubmedcentral
proquest
crossref
pubmed
SourceType Open Website
Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
Index Database
StartPage 557
SubjectTerms Adult
Clinical Competence
Emergency Department Operations
Emergency Medicine - education
Emergency Service, Hospital
Female
Focus Groups
Humans
Interprofessional Relations
Male
Original Research
Patient Care Team
Patient Simulation
Simulation Training
SummonAdditionalLinks – databaseName: Directory of Open Access Journals
  dbid: DOA
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1bS8MwFA6yJ0HEu_NGBPEt2qbX-DZlYwwmwjbcW0iTFCusE7eBP9-TpN1FBF986UNbSDin7fm-5uT7ELrxdaaAWAhiuAWBCu0RkVJGvJwq7SdKMet12H-Ou6OwN47Ga1ZfpifMyQO7wN2HQqrcGHP7ZoFIMCaYEagRIdVMiszpfHqsJlPuGxxFibXWBHQSE-Z5Y6euGaW-bxUI3vXkzjff5o1qZEX7f0OaPxsm1ypQZw_tVtARt9yU99GWLg_Qjvvvht12okPE3SouFCQ81GKCX1YbAx5wC_eLL61I39pGz3CtSIJt4wCuGhBXWh24KPGsmC_woJhUNl9HaNRpD5-6pDJRIBLYAiVZkElfwjEXXqiAfWWAqZlMGJMx5CMycvOhyhOa5lLSxIs0gA5fAREKVRarIDhGjXJa6lOEYxkDn6Sm0QRQC1VpkoVAELWM0iSPA6-Jbutg8g-nlcGBY5io89f2YNhr97mNehM9mlAvbzIS1_YEJJ5Xied_Jb6JrutEcXglzDqHKPV0MeNGgcfsuA1goBOXuOVQgVGrAdTSROlGSjfmsnmlLN6s7DYg0wjgTnL2H7M_R9sU4JFr_L1AjfnnQl8CvJlnV_ZJ_gZ9T_fM
  priority: 102
  providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals
– databaseName: Scholars Portal Journals: Open Access
  dbid: M48
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1bS8MwFA5eXgQR784bEcS3jDZNL_FFVCYiTAQ33FtIk1QrrtNdYP57T9Juc-qjL33ohYRzmp7v6zn5DkKnvkk1EAtJLLcgEKE9IhPKiZdRbfxYa-56HTbvo9s2u-uEnZmkUGXAwZ_UzvaTavff6uOPzwtY8IBf62Hi-05T4NV067792i6iZcqApNsqPjZNKIRh7HptAlyJCPe8Tim3-fvxufDkVPz_gp4_Kyi_haSbdbRWYUl8WTp_Ay2YYhOtlj_icLm_aAuJMq0LEQq3jOzih9lOgXN8iZv52GjSdH2kB3giUYJdJQGuKhJn4h04L_AgH47wY96t-n5to_ZNo3V9S6quCkQBfaAkDVLlKzhm0mMa6FgKIJurmHMVgYNCqz_PdBbTJFOKxl5oAIX4GpgR02mkg2AHLRW9wuwhHKkICCa1lScAY6hO4pQBYzQqTOIsCrwaOpsYU7yX4hkCSIe1unhqPLbuGk3hrF5DV9bU05us5rU70es_i2oJCSaVzmyLdt-mCiXnklupIsmo4UqmQQ2dTBwlYI3YxIcsTG80EFaSx27BDWCg3dJx06ECK18DMKaGkjmXzs1l_kqRvzgdboCqIeCfeP8_Zn-AVijgpbIS-BAtDfsjcwR4Z5geuzf5C6f3_-8
  priority: 102
  providerName: Scholars Portal
Title Assessing Team Performance: A Mixed-Methods Analysis Using Interprofessional in situ Simulation
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39028241
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3082628632
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11254157
https://doaj.org/article/4acdf590813047a99a97078a42e9cab3
Volume 25
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1La9wwEB6S9FIope9umy4qlN60a8tP9ZaEDSHgsDQbujehl1uX2huyu9Cf35FkJ9mQUy8--IGEZqz5Pmn0DcCX2CqDxEJSxy0oRuiIypJxGtXM2Lgwhvtah9VFfnaVni-z5R7kw1kYn7SvVTPp_rSTrvnlcyuvWz0d8sSm8-oEMUKGgaeY7sM-eujA0cP8m2WFL6uJyCSnPIqWQVkzK-PYqw_8tu0kdvPyTiTygv2PocyHyZL3os_pC3jew0ZyFLr3EvZs9wqehTU3Eo4SvQYRdnAxGJGFlS2Z3x0K-EaOSNX8tYZWvmT0mgxqJMQnDZA--fBOp4M0HVk3my25bNq-xNcbuDqdLU7OaF9AgWpkCoyqROlY47WWUWqQeSnE01wXnOscbZE5qfnU1AUra61ZEWUWAUdskASlRuUmSd7CQbfq7Hsguc6RSzKXZIKIhZmyUCmSQ6uzsqjzJBrB12EwxXXQyRDIL9yoix-zy8X5rBJ-1Edw7Ib69iUnb-1vrG5-it7IIpXa1K4ae-x2BSXnkjtVIpkyy7VUyQg-D4YS-Du4PQ7Z2dV2LZz6jjttm2BD74LhbptKnFINIpYRlDsm3enL7hP0QC-5PXjch___9CM8ZQiIQqrvIRxsbrb2EwKajRqjFy-LMTw5nl3Mv4_9sgBeq7Qce8_-B_Nx-20
link.rule.ids 230,315,730,783,787,867,888,2109,2228,24330,27936,27937,31732,33757,53804,53806
linkProvider National Library of Medicine
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Jb9QwFH4q5QBSxb4Mq5EQN2eyJ-ZWqqmG0lSVOlXnZnkLpJBM1ZmREL-eZztpmYoLXHLIoizP9vu--PP3AN5HRmokFoJabkExQ4dUlDGjYR1rExVaM1frsDrKp6fpwTybb0E-rIVxon0lm6D70QZd881pKy9aNR50YuPjag8xQoaJpxjfgtvYYcN0YOl-BM6ywhXWRGySUxaGc--tmZVR5PwHzk0bRHZk3shFzrL_bzjzplzyj_yzfx_Ohif3spPvwXolA_Xrhqnjv7_aA7jXQ1Ky648_hC3TPYId_z-P-GVKj4H72WFMdGRmREuOrxccfCS7pGp-Gk0rV456SQanE-IECaQXNl57gJCmI8tmtSYnTduXD3sCp_uT2d6U9sUZqEIWElOZSBUp3NYiTDWyOolYnamCMZVjnDNrY5_quojLWqm4CDODYCbSSLBSLXOdJE9hu1t05jmQXOXIU2MrYEE0FOuykCkST6OysqjzJBzBhyFM_MJ7cHDkLjae_GxyMjuYVNzFcwSfbBCvTrLW2W7H4vIr778yT4XSta30HtkZR8GYYNbxSKSxYUrIZATvhibAsavZ-RPRmcV6ya2zj13Jm-CNnvkmcXWrxLrgIBoaQbnRWDaeZfMINgFn5z2E_MX_X_oW7kxn1SE__Hz05SXcjRF4eUnxK9heXa7NawROK_nG9ZLfC6UZTQ
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1bb9MwGLVgSAgJcR8rVyMh3pwmztW8jdFqDDJVWicq8WD5Fsi2pNXaStN-PZ_tZKMTT3vJQ-Iol8_Od058fD6EPkZGaiAWglhuQSBDh0QUlJGwotpEudbM1TosD7P94-Rgls46VeWyk1W2StZBe9YEbf3HaSsXjRr2OrHhpNwDjJBC4smHC10N76J7MGjDrGfq_iucprkrrgn4JCMsDGfeXzMtosh5EJyYJojs13kjHznb_v9hzZuSyX9y0Pgx-tXfvZeenAbrlQzU5Q1jx9s93hP0qIOmeNe3eYrumPYZeuj_62G_XOk54n6WGBIenhrR4Mn1woPPeBeX9YXRpHRlqZe4dzzBTpiAO4HjtRcIrlu8rFdrfFQ3XRmxF-h4PJru7ZOuSANRwEYokbFUkYJtJcJEA7uTgNmZyhlTGcQ7tXb2ia5yWlRK0TxMDYCaSAPRSrTMdBxvo6123podhDOVAV-lVsgCqIjqIpcJEFCj0iKvsjgcoE99qPjCe3Fw4DA2pvzn6Gh6MCq5i-kAfbGBvGpkLbTdjvn5b969aZ4IpStb8T2yM4-CMcGs85FIqGFKyHiAPvTdgMOQs_MoojXz9ZJbhx-7ojeGC7303eLqUrF1wwFUNEDFRofZuJfNI9ANnK13H_ZXtz_1Pbo_-TrmP74dfn-NHlDAX15Z_AZtrc7X5i3gp5V85wbKX9IMG80
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessing+Team+Performance%3A+A+Mixed-Methods+Analysis+Using+Interprofessional+in+situ+Simulation&rft.jtitle=The+western+journal+of+emergency+medicine&rft.au=Ashley+C.+Rider&rft.au=Sarah+R.+Williams&rft.au=Vivien+Jones&rft.au=Daniel+Rebagliati&rft.date=2024-07-01&rft.pub=eScholarship+Publishing%2C+University+of+California&rft.issn=1936-900X&rft.eissn=1936-9018&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=557&rft.epage=564&rft_id=info:doi/10.5811%2Fwestjem.18012&rft.externalDBID=DOA&rft.externalDocID=oai_doaj_org_article_4acdf590813047a99a97078a42e9cab3
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1936-9018&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1936-9018&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1936-9018&client=summon