Advertisement

Social ties between team members affect patient satisfaction: a data-driven approach to handling complex network analyses

  • Betina Ristorp AndersenEmail author
  • Jesper Løve Hinrich
  • Maria Birkvad Rasmussen
  • Sune Lehmann
  • Charlotte Ringsted
  • Ellen Løkkegaard
  • Martin G. Tolsgaard
Article

Abstract

Research from outside the medical field suggests that social ties between team-members influence knowledge sharing, improve coordination, and facilitate task completion. However, the relative importance of social ties among team-members for patient satisfaction remains unknown. In this study, we explored the association between social ties within emergency teams performing simulated caesarean sections (CS) and patient-actor satisfaction. Two hundred seventy-two participants were allocated to 33 teams performing two emergency CSs in a simulated setting. We collected data on social ties between team-members, measured as affective, personal and professional ties. Ties were rated on 5-point Likert scales. In addition, participants’ clinical experience, demographic data and their knowledge about team members’ roles were surveyed. Perceived patient satisfaction was measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Data was analysed with a linear regression model using elastic net regularization. In total, 109 predictor variables were analysed including 84 related to social ties and 25 related to clinical experience, demographics and knowledge test scores. Of the 84 variables reflecting social ties, 34 (41%) had significant association with patient satisfaction, p < 0.01. By contrast, a significant association with patient satisfaction was found for only one (4%) of the 25 variables reflecting clinical experience, demographics and knowledge of team roles. Affective ties and personal ties were found to be far more important predictors in the statistical model than professional ties and predictors relating to clinical experience. Social ties between emergency team members may be important predictors of patient satisfaction. The results from this study help to enhance our conceptual understanding of social ties and their implications for team-dynamics. Our study challenges existing views of team-performance by placing emphasis on achieving collective competence through affective and personal social ties, rather than focusing on traditional measures of expertise.

Keywords

Social ties Patient satisfaction Education Simulation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the staff at the department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics and the Department of Anaesthetics/Operating room for their participation. Especially thank to the steering group: Midwives Mette Lise Buchwald, anaesthetic specialist Agnieszka Huscher, Andrea Kisling, Bjørn Dehlie, Pernille Bækgaard and scrub nurse Margrethe Klaaborg.

Author contribution

BRA contributed to the conception and design of the work, and to data acquisition and interpretation, data analysis and drafted the paper. MT and MBR contributed to the conception and design of the work and to data acquisition and interpretation, data analysis and assisted in drafting the paper. EL contributed to the conception and design of the work and to data acquisition and interpretation and assisted in drafting the paper. JLH and SL contributed to data analysis and interpretation and assisted in drafting of the paper. CR contributed to the conception and design of the work and assisted in drafting the paper. All authors contributed to the critical revision of the paper and approved the final manuscript for publication. All authors have agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Funding

The project was funded by the Danish foundation TrygFonden.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors have declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

The study was reported to the Danish Patient Safety Authority (3-3013-1732/1) and approved. Data was reported to the Danish data protection agency (NOH-2015-040. I-Suite: 04287).

References

  1. Afanador, N. L., Tran, T. N., & Buydens, L. M. C. (2014). An assessment of the jackknife and bootstrap procedures on uncertainty estimation in the variable importance in the projection metric. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 137, 162–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agoritsas, T., Bovier, P. A., & Perneger, T. V. (2005). Patient reports of undesirable events during hospitalization. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 20(10), 922–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arlot, S., & Celisse, A. (2010). A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection. Statistical Surveys, 4, 40–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balkundi, P., & Harrison, D. (2006). Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effects on team viability and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 49–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blomquist, J. L., Quiroz, L. H., Macmillan, D., McCullough, A., & Handa, V. L. (2011). Mothers’ satisfaction with planned vaginal and planned cesarean birth. American Journal of Perinatology, 28(5), 383–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, L. D., Permezel, M., Holberton, J. R., & Whitehead, C. L. (2016). Neonatal outcomes after introduction of a national intrapartum fetal surveillance education program: A retrospective cohort study. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 30(15), 1–5.Google Scholar
  7. Cornthwaite, K., Edwards, S., & Siassakos, D. (2013). Reducing risk in maternity by optimising teamwork and leadership: An evidence-based approach to save mothers and babies. Best Practice and Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 27(4), 571–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Curtis, J. R., Back, A. L., Ford, D. W., et al. (2013). Effect of communication skills training for residents and nurse practitioners on quality of communication with patients with serious illness: A randomized trial. JAMA, 310(21), 2271–2281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Montjoye, Y. A., Stopczynski, A., Shmueli, E., Pentland, A., & Lehmann, S. (2014). The strength of the strongest ties in collaborative problem solving. Scientific Reports, 4, 5277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2001). The elements of statistical learning (Vol. 1, pp. 241–249). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Gude, T., Grimstad, H., Holen, A., et al. (2015). Can we rely on simulated patients’ satisfaction with their consultation for assessing medical students’ communication skills? A cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Education, 15, 225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrison, D., Mohammed, S., McGrath, J., Florey, A., & Vanderstoep, S. (2003). Time matters in team performance: Effects of member familiarity, entrainment, and task discontinuity on speed and quality. Personnel Psychology, 56(3), 633–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Henry, B. W., McCarthy, D. M., Nannicelli, A. P., Seivert, N. P., & Vozenilek, J. A. (2016). Patients’ views of teamwork in the emergency department offer insights about team performance. Health Expectations, 19(3), 702–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hodges, B. D., & Lingard, L. (Eds.). (2012). The question of competence: Reconsidering medical education in the twenty-first century. Cornell: Cornell University.Google Scholar
  15. Hoerl, A. E., & Kennard, R. W. (1970). Ridge regression: Biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems., 12(1), 55–67.Google Scholar
  16. Ilgen, J. S., Ma, I. W., Hatala, R., & Cook, D. A. (2015). A systematic review of validity evidence for checklists versus global rating scales in simulation-based assessment. Medical Education, 49(2), 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. (2001).Google Scholar
  18. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Preventing infant death and injury during delivery (sentinel event alert issue #30); 21 July 2004. Assessed 28 Oct 2008.Google Scholar
  19. Kurmann, A., Keller, S., Tschan-Semmer, F., et al. (2014). Impact of team familiarity in the operating room on surgical complications. World Journal of Surgery, 38(12), 3047–3052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liberati, E. G., Gorli, M., & Scaratti, G. (2016). Invisible walls within multidisciplinary teams: Disciplinary boundaries and their effects on integrated care. Social Science and Medicine, 150, 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lingard, L. (2016). Paradoxical truths and persistent myths: Reframing the team competence conversation. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 36(Suppl 1), S19–S21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. National Clinical Guideline Centre (UK). (2012).Google Scholar
  23. O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction. United States: Crown Books.Google Scholar
  24. Pollack, J., & Matous, P. (2019). Testing the impact of targeted team building on project team communication using social network analysis. Int J Project Management, 37, 473–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Powell, A. E., & Davies, H. T. (2012). The struggle to improve patient care in the face of professional boundaries. Social Science and Medicine, 75(5), 807–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rasmussen, M. B., Dieckmann, P., Barry Issenberg, S., Ostergaard, D., Soreide, E., & Ringsted, C. V. (2013). Long-term intended and unintended experiences after advanced life support training. Resuscitation, 84(3), 373–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ren, Y., & Argote, L. (2011). Transactive memory systems 1985–2010: An integrative framework of key dimensions, antecedents, and consequences. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 189–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Riskind, P., Fossey, L., & Brill, K. (2011). Why measure patient satisfaction? The Journal of Medical Practice Management, 26(4), 217–220.Google Scholar
  29. Roberts, N. K., Williams, R. G., Schwind, C. J., et al. (2014). The impact of brief team communication, leadership and team behavior training on ad hoc team performance in trauma care settings. American Journal of Surgery, 207(2), 170–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Robinson, P., Salmon, P., & Yentis, S. (1998). Maternal satisfaction. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia, 7(1), 32–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schlesinger, M., Grob, R., & Shaller, D. (2015). Using patient-reported information to improve clinical practice. Health Services Research, 50(Suppl 2), 2116–2154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Siems, A., Cartron, A., Watson, A., McCarter, R., Jr., & Levin, A. (2017). Improving pediatric rapid response team performance through crew resource management training of team leaders. Hosp Pediatr., 7(2), 88–95.Google Scholar
  33. Singh, S. C., Sheth, R. D., Burrows, J. F., & Rosen, P. (2016). Factors influencing patient experience in pediatric neurology. Pediatric Neurology, 60, 37–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smirnova, A., Ravelli, A. C. J., Stalmeijer, R. E., et al. (2017). The association between learning climate and adverse obstetrical outcomes in 16 nontertiary obstetrics–gynecology departments in the Netherlands. Academic Medicine, 92(12), 1740–1748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stepaniak, P. S., Heij, C., Buise, M. P., Mannaerts, G. H., Smulders, J. F., & Nienhuijs, S. W. (2012). Bariatric surgery with operating room teams that stayed fixed during the day: A multicenter study analyzing the effects on patient outcomes, teamwork and safety climate, and procedure duration. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 115(6), 1384–1392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thye, S. R., Vincent, A., Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (2014). Relational cohesion, social commitments, and person-to-group ties: Twenty-five years of a theoretical research program. Advances in Group Processes, 31, 99–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society., 58, 267–288.Google Scholar
  38. Tsai, T. C., Orav, E. J., & Jha, A. K. (2015). Patient satisfaction and quality of surgical care in US hospitals. Annals of Surgery, 261(1), 2–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tucker, A. L. (2007). An empirical study of system improvement by frontline employees in hospital units. M&Som-Manufacturing and Service Operations Management., 9(4), 492–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wegner, D. (1986). A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen & G. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185–208). Springer: New York.Google Scholar
  41. Weisstein EW (2004) Booktitle: Bonferroni correction. Mathworld. Wolfram.com.Google Scholar
  42. Rasmussen B, Tolsgaard M, Dieckmann P, et al. (xxxx) The complex influence of social relations on teamwork in managing clinical emergencies: A constructivis grounded theory of intensive care staff. Not published. In review.Google Scholar
  43. Zhong, X., Huang, Q., Davison, R. M., Yang, X., & Chen, H. (2012). Empowering teams through social network ties. International Journal of Information Management, 32(3), 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zou, H., & Hastie, T. (2005). Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 67, 301–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, North Zealand HospitalUniversity of CopenhagenHillerødDenmark
  2. 2.Copenhagen Academy of Medical Education and Simulation, Capital Region of Denmark2100 CopenhagenDenmark
  3. 3.Cognitive Systems, Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer ScienceTechnical University of DenmarkLyngbyDenmark
  4. 4.Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hvidovre HospitalUniversity of Copenhagen2650 HvidovreDenmark
  5. 5.Center for Health Science Education, Faculty of HealthAarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark
  6. 6.Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, RigshospitaletUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations