Listen
2 Ergebnisse
Ergebnisse nach Hochschule und Institut
Publikation TEAMs go VR - validating the TEAM in a virtual reality (VR) medical team training(BioMed Central, 2024) Wespi, Rafael; Schwendimann, Lukas; Neher, Andrea; Birrenbach, Tanja; Schauber, Stefan K.; Manser, Tanja; Sauter, Thomas C.; Kämmer, Juliane E.Abstract Background Inadequate collaboration in healthcare can lead to medical errors, highlighting the importance of interdisciplinary teamwork training. Virtual reality (VR) simulation-based training presents a promising, cost-effective approach. This study evaluates the effectiveness of the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) for assessing healthcare student teams in VR environments to improve training methodologies. Methods Forty-two medical and nursing students participated in a VR-based neurological emergency scenario as part of an interprofessional team training program. Their performances were assessed using a modified TEAM tool by two trained coders. Reliability, internal consistency, and concurrent validity of the tool were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Cronbach’s alpha. Results Rater agreement on TEAM’s leadership, teamwork, and task management domains was high, with ICC values between 0.75 and 0.90. Leadership demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90), while teamwork and task management showed moderate to acceptable consistency (alpha = 0.78 and 0.72, respectively). Overall, the TEAM tool exhibited high internal consistency (alpha = 0.89) and strong concurrent validity with significant correlations to global performance ratings. Conclusion The TEAM tool proved to be a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating team dynamics in VR-based training scenarios. This study highlights VR’s potential in enhancing medical education, especially in remote or distanced learning contexts. It demonstrates a dependable approach for team performance assessment, adding value to VR-based medical training. These findings pave the way for more effective, accessible interdisciplinary team assessments, contributing significantly to the advancement of medical education.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher ZeitschriftPublikation Developing the TeamOBS-vacuum-assisted delivery checklist to assess clinical performance in a vacuum-assisted delivery: a Delphi study with initial validation(Frontiers Research Foundation, 2024) Brogaard, Lise; Hinshaw, Kim; Kierkegaard, Ole; Manser, Tanja; Uldbjerg, Niels; Hvidman, LoneIn Northern Europe, vacuum-assisted delivery (VAD) accounts for 6–15% of all deliveries; VAD is considered safe when conducted by adequately trained personnel. However, failed vacuum extraction can be harmful to both the mother and child. Therefore, the clinical performance in VAD must be assessed to guide learning, determine a performance benchmark, and evaluate the quality to achieve an overall high performance. We were unable to identify a pre-existing tool for evaluating the clinical performance in real-life vacuum-assisted births. We aimed to develop and validate a checklist for assessing the clinical performance in VAD. We conducted a Delphi process, described as an interactive process where experts answer questions until answers converge toward a “joint opinion” (consensus). We invited international experts as Delphi panelists and reached a consensus after four Delphi rounds, described as follows: (1) the panelists were asked to add, remove, or suggest corrections to the preliminary list of items essential for evaluating clinical performance in VAD; (2) the panelists applied weights of clinical importance on a Likert scale of 1–5 for each item; (3) each panelist revised their original scores after reviewing a summary of the other panelists’ scores and arguments; and (4) the TeamOBS-VAD was tested using videos of real-life VADs, and the Delphi panel made final adjustments and approved the checklist. Twelve Delphi panelists from the UK (n = 3), Norway (n = 2), Sweden (n = 3), Denmark (n = 3), and Iceland (n = 1) were included. After four Delphi rounds, the Delphi panel reached a consensus on the checklist items and scores. The TeamOBS-VAD checklist was tested using 60 videos of real-life vacuum extractions. The inter-rater agreement had an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.73; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of [0.58, 0.83], and that for the average of two raters was ICC 0.84 95% CI [0.73, 0.91]. The TeamOBS-VAD score was not associated with difficulties in delivery, such as the number of contractions during vacuum extraction delivery, cephalic level, rotation, and position. Failed vacuum extraction occurred in 6% of the video deliveries, but none were associated with the teams with low clinical performance scores. The TeamOBS-VAD checklist provides a valid and reliable evaluation of the clinical performance of vaginal-assisted vacuum extraction.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift