Outcome
Type |
Measure |
Description |
Time frame |
Safety issue |
Other |
Subjective Stress responses |
As a manipulation check, the investigators will compare the team subjective stress scores between the low stress and high stress scenarios. Subjective stress will be assessed with the Y Form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), a 20-item tool designed to measure an individual's momentary level of anxiety by self-report. The STAI has been shown to be sensitive to manipulations of acute stress in simulated settings. Each inventory is scored between 20 and 80, and has population anxiety reference ranges available. Higher scores indicate greater levels of anxiety. In this study, participants will complete the STAI at baseline, immediately before, and immediately after each scenario. |
Through study completion, and average of 1 year |
|
Other |
Cognitive appraisal |
As a manipulation check, cognitive appraisal will be assessed immediately before and after each scenario. Primary appraisal will be examined by asking the participants to answer the questions 'How demanding do you expect the upcoming task to be?' before the scenario and 'How demanding was the task you just completed?' after the scenario. Secondary appraisal will be measured by asking the participants to answer the question: 'How able are [were] you to cope with this task?' Participants will indicate their answers on an anchored 10-point Likert scale. The index of cognitive appraisal is calculated as the ratio of the primary appraisal (demands) to the secondary appraisal (resources). If the resources are assessed as being equal to or greater than the task demands, the situation is appraised as a 'challenge' (ratio = 1). If the task demands are appraised as being greater than the resources, the situation is appraised as a 'threat' (ratio > 1). I |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year |
|
Other |
Heart rate variability - rMSSD |
As manipulation check, the investigators will compare the team physiological stress scores between the low stress & high stress scenarios by heart rate variability (HRV) monitoring. Continuous heart rate (R-R intervals) will be measured with the POLARĀ® H10 device, a non-invasive chest strap with a transducer worn directly against the sternum paired with a smart device application (EliteHRV). The participants HRV will be recorded for 5 minutes at the start of the session (Baseline), 5 minutes prior to start of each scenario (Pre-scenario - to capture anticipatory stress responses), for the duration of each scenario (divided into sequential 5 minute periods), as well as 5 minutes following each scenario (post-scenario, to observe stress recovery rates). For each participant, the investigators will analyse the participant's root mean square of successive R-R interval differences (rMSSD). |
During the simulation sessions, throughout the study: 5 minutes at start of each session (Baseline), 5 minutes prior to start of each scenario, for the duration of each scenario (divided into sequential 5 min periods), 5 minutes following each scenario |
|
Other |
Heart rate variability - pNN50 |
As manipulation check, the investigators will compare the team physiological stress scores between the low stress & high stress scenarios by heart rate variability (HRV) monitoring. Continuous heart rate (R-R intervals) will be measured with the POLARĀ® H10 device, a non-invasive chest strap with a transducer worn directly against the sternum paired with a smart device application (EliteHRV). The participants HRV will be recorded for 5 minutes at the start of the session (Baseline), 5 minutes prior to start of each scenario (Pre-scenario - to capture anticipatory stress responses), for the duration of each scenario (divided into sequential 5 minute periods), as well as 5 minutes following each scenario (post-scenario, to observe stress recovery rates). For each participant, the investigators will analyse the participant's percentage of successive R-R intervals that differ by more than 50Ms (pNN50). |
During the simulation sessions, throughout the study: 5 minutes at start of each session (Baseline), 5 minutes prior to start of each scenario, for the duration of each scenario (divided into sequential 5 min periods), 5 minutes following each scenario |
|
Primary |
Team performance |
Team performance will be assessed using the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), which was developed to assess the quality of medical emergency team performance. It consists of 12 items. The first 11 items assess leadership, team coordination, team communication, and situation awareness on 5-point Likert scale. The 12th item is an overall measure of a team's performance and scored on a 10-point Likert-scale. Higher scores indicate better performance. The teams performance during the scenarios will be video-recorded and then scored by blinded raters |
Over 3 months at the end of the data collection phase. |
|
Secondary |
Ratio of information management to task management |
Using a structured observation system of team coordination during non-routine events (Co-ACT, Framework for Observing Coordination Behaviour in Acute Care Teams), the investigators will characterize how and when the teams engage in coordination and communication activities that have been linked with high performing teams, but that have yet to be integrated into common healthcare team training approaches. The ratio of information management versus task management will be calculate as the amount of time in which the team members communicate and coordinate actions related to information management versus the amount of time communicating and coordinating actions related to task management. The teams performance during the scenarios will be video-recorded and then scored by blinded raters |
Over 3 months at the end of the data collection phase. |
|
Secondary |
Frequency of chances between implicit and explicit coordination |
Using a structured observation system of team coordination during non-routine events (Co-ACT, Framework for Observing Coordination Behaviour in Acute Care Teams), the investigators will characterize how and when the teams engage in coordination and communication activities that have been linked with high performing teams, but that have yet to be integrated into common healthcare team training approaches. The frequency of changes between implicit coordination and explicit coordination will be calculated as the number of times, in a given scenario, the team switches from implicit coordination to explicit coordination, and vice-versa. The teams performance during the scenarios will be video-recorded and then scored by blinded raters, |
Over 3 months at the end of the data collection phase. |
|
Secondary |
Team heedfulness score |
Using a structured observation system of team coordination during non-routine events (Co-ACT, Framework for Observing Coordination Behaviour in Acute Care Teams), the investigators will characterize how and when the teams engage in coordination and communication activities that have been linked with high performing teams, but that have yet to be integrated into common healthcare team training approaches. The degree of heedfulness in the teams will be calculated as the total time that team members engage in heedful behaviours (Noticing and communicating, Anticipating, Maintaining standards, Backup Behaviour, Closed-Loop Communication). The teams performance during the scenarios will be video-recorded and then scored by blinded raters |
Over 3 months at the end of the data collection phase. |
|