TY - JOUR
T1 - Why saying what you mean matters
T2 - An analysis of trauma team communication
AU - Jung, Hee Soo
AU - Warner-Hillard, Charles
AU - Thompson, Ryan
AU - Haines, Krista
AU - Moungey, Brooke
AU - LeGare, Anne
AU - Shaffer, David Williamson
AU - Pugh, Carla
AU - Agarwal, Suresh
AU - Sullivan, Sarah
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/2
Y1 - 2018/2
N2 - Background: We hypothesized that team communication with unmatched grammatical form and communicative intent (mixed mode communication) would correlate with worse trauma teamwork. Methods: Interdisciplinary trauma simulations were conducted. Team performance was rated using the TEAM tool. Team communication was coded for grammatical form and communicative intent. The rate of mixed mode communication (MMC) was calculated. MMC rates were compared to overall TEAM scores. Statements with advisement intent (attempts to guide behavior) and edification intent (objective information) were specifically examined. The rates of MMC with advisement intent (aMMC) and edification intent (eMMC) were also compared to TEAM scores. Results: TEAM scores did not correlate with MMC or eMMC. However, aMMC rates negatively correlated with total TEAM scores (r = −0.556, p = 0.025) and with the TEAM task management component scores (r = −0.513, p = 0.042). Conclusions: Trauma teams with lower rates of mixed mode communication with advisement intent had better non-technical skills as measured by TEAM.
AB - Background: We hypothesized that team communication with unmatched grammatical form and communicative intent (mixed mode communication) would correlate with worse trauma teamwork. Methods: Interdisciplinary trauma simulations were conducted. Team performance was rated using the TEAM tool. Team communication was coded for grammatical form and communicative intent. The rate of mixed mode communication (MMC) was calculated. MMC rates were compared to overall TEAM scores. Statements with advisement intent (attempts to guide behavior) and edification intent (objective information) were specifically examined. The rates of MMC with advisement intent (aMMC) and edification intent (eMMC) were also compared to TEAM scores. Results: TEAM scores did not correlate with MMC or eMMC. However, aMMC rates negatively correlated with total TEAM scores (r = −0.556, p = 0.025) and with the TEAM task management component scores (r = −0.513, p = 0.042). Conclusions: Trauma teams with lower rates of mixed mode communication with advisement intent had better non-technical skills as measured by TEAM.
KW - Communication
KW - Non-technical skills
KW - Simulation
KW - Speech acts
KW - Trauma
KW - Verbal response modes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85034449186&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.11.008
DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.11.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 29153980
AN - SCOPUS:85034449186
SN - 0002-9610
VL - 215
SP - 250
EP - 254
JO - American Journal of Surgery
JF - American Journal of Surgery
IS - 2
ER -