Background: Non-technical errors, such as insufficient communication or leadership, are a major cause of medical failures during trauma resuscitation. Research on staffing variation among trauma teams on teamwork is still in their infancy. In this study, the extent of variation in trauma team staffing was assessed. Our hypothesis was that there would be a high variation in trauma team staffing. Methods: Trauma team composition of consecutive resuscitations of injured patients were evaluated using videos. All trauma team members that where part of a trauma team during a trauma resuscitation were identified and classified during a one-week period. Other outcomes were number of unique team members, number of new team members following the previous resuscitation and new team members following the previous resuscitation in the same shift (Day, Evening, Night). Results: All thirty-two analyzed resuscitations had a unique trauma team composition and 101 unique members were involved. A mean of 5.71 (SD 2.57) new members in teams of consecutive trauma resuscitations was found, which was two-third of the trauma team. Mean team members present during trauma resuscitation was 8.38 (SD 1.43). Most variation in staffing was among nurses (32 unique members), radiology technicians (22 unique members) and anesthetists (19 unique members). The least variation was among trauma surgeons (3 unique members) and ER physicians (3 unique members). Conclusion: We found an extremely high variation in trauma team staffing during thirty-two consecutive resuscitations at our level one trauma center which is incorporated in an academic teaching hospital. Further research is required to explore and prevent potential negative effects of staffing variation in trauma teams on teamwork, processes and patient related outcomes.
The aim of this study was to test the inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Physician Rating Scale (PRS) and the Edinburgh Visual Gait Analysis Interval Testing (GAIT) scale for use in children with cerebral palsy (CP). Both assessment scales are quantitative observational scales, evaluating gait. The study involved 24 patients ages 3 to 10 years (mean age 6.7 years) with an abnormal gait caused by CP. They were all able to walk independently with or without walking aids. Of the children 15 had spastic diplegia and 9 had spastic hemiplegia. With a minimum time interval of 6 weeks, video recordings of the gait of these 24 patients were scored twice by three independent observers using the PRS and the GAIT scale. The study showed that both the GAIT scale and the PRS had excellent intraobserver reliability but poor interobserver reliability for children with CP. In the total scores of the GAIT scale and the PRS, the three observers showed systematic differences. Consequently, the authors recommend that longitudinal assessments of a patient should be done by one observer only.
LINK
In clinical practice, formal elements of art products are regularly used in art therapy observation to obtain insight into clients’ mental health and provide directions for further treatment. Due to the diversity of formal elements used in existing studies and the inconsistency in the interpretation, it is unclear which formal elements contribute to insight into clients’ mental health. In this qualitative study using Constructivist Grounded Theory, eight art therapists were interviewed in-depth to identify which formal elements they observe, how they describe mental health and how they associate formal elements with mental health. Findings of this study show that art therapists in this study observe the combination of movement, dynamic, contour and repetition (i.e., primary formal elements) with mixture of color, figuration and color saturation (i.e., secondary formal elements). Primary and secondary elements interacting together construct the structure and variation of the art product. Art therapists rarely interpret these formal elements in terms of symptoms or diagnosis. Instead, they use concepts such as balance and adaptability (i.e., self-management, openness, flexibility, and creativity). They associate balance, specifically being out of balance, with the severity of the clients’ problem and adaptability with clients’ strengths and resources. In the conclusion of the article we discuss the findings’ implications for practice and further research.
