Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Science of Teamwork in Healthcare: Importance to Patient Outcome

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Medical-Legal Aspects of Acute Care Medicine

Abstract

A high-performing team is more than a group, and it is more than the sum of its individuals. There is one single best definition, structure, or defining characteristic of a high-performing team, although spirit and synergy are essential. There are dysfunctional teams. Teams may or may not have a defined hierarchy. Where a team has a leader, the leadership style is important, although there is no one best leadership style. In some teams, leadership is fluid or situational. The enormous complexity of modern healthcare and the enormous complexity of modern clinical healthcare demand a multidisciplinary approach. Where the multidisciplinary approach is team-based, it is reflected in patient care outcomes, patient satisfaction, and a healthy and productive workplace.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Woods D. The Quotable Osler. BMJ. 2003;326(326):289.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Glymour C, Stalker D. Engineers, cranks, physicians, magicians. N Engl J Med. 1983;308:960–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wyngaarden JB, Smith LH. Cecil textbook of medicine. Phuiladelphia: Saunders; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Szalados JE. Complications and risk management. In: Barasch P, Cullen B, Cahalan M, Ortega R, Sharar S, Stock C, editors. Foundations of clinical anesthesia. Phildelphia: Wolters-Kluwer; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Swensen SJ, Meyer GS, Nelson EC, et al. Cottage industry to postindustrial care: the revolution in health care delivery. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(5):e12. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp0911199. Epub 2010 Jan 20.ew England Journal of Medicine. 2010 Jan 20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Starr P. The social transformation of American medicine. New York: Basic Books; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, 33 Ill. 2d 326, 211 N.E.2d 253, 1965 Ill. LEXIS 250, 14 A.L.R.3d 860 (Ill. 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  9. See University of Louisville v. Hammock, 127 Ky. 564, 106 SW 219, 220 (1907) noting that “the sick leave their homes and antrum hospitals because of the superior treatment there promised them” and, see also Williams v. St. Claire Medical Center 657 S.W.2d 590 (1983) holding that “when a hospital has received a patient, under whatever circumstance, and has undertaken treatment, that patient is owed a duty by the hospital through its employees and staff, including independent staff personnel, to exercise appropriate care to provide for the patient's well-being and to promote his cure. A breach of this duty may expose the hospital to liability in tort. Any lesser rule would be insensible to the true role of a hospital as an institution in present day society.”

    Google Scholar 

  10. What is risk management in healthcare? NEJM Catalyst. April 25, 2018. Online at: https://catalyst.nejm.org/what-is-risk-management-in-healthcare/.

  11. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st Century Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Washington, DC: N.A. Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. von Bertalanffy L. General system theory; foundations, development, applications. New York: G. Braziller; 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Petula S. Can applying systems theory improve quality in healthcare systems? J Healthcare Qual. Web Exclusive. 2005;27(6):W6-2–6. Online at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.470.9969&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Weaver SJ, Lubomksi LH, Wilson RF, Pfoh ER, Martinez KA, Dy SM. Promoting a culture of safety as a patient safety strategy: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(5 Pt 2):369–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Szalados JE. Developing and leading a sustainable high reliability high-performance unit: series of quality, teamwork, medical error, and patient safety. In: Szalados JE, editor. Ethics and law for neurosciences clinicians: foundations and evolving challenges. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press; 2019. p. 116–29. ISBN: 978-0-8135-9388-3.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Patient safety essentials toolkit. Online at: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/Patient-Safety-Essentials-Toolkit.aspx.

  17. Vaughan D. The challenger launch decision: risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gouran DS, Hirokawa RY, Martz AE. A critical analysis of factors related to decisional processes involved in the challenger disaster. Commun Stud. 1986;37(3):118–35.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pace RC. Technical communication, group differentiation, and the decision to launch the space shuttle challenger. J Tech Writ Commun. 1988;18(3):207–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gaba DM, Howard SK, Jump B. Production pressure in the work environment. California anesthesiologists’ attitudes and experiences. Anesthesiology. 1994 Aug;81(2):488–500.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Roberts KH. Some characteristics of high reliability organizations. Organ Sci. 1990b;1:160–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM. Managing the unexpected. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Roberts KH, Rousseau DM. Research in nearly failure-free, high-reliability organizations: having the bubble. IEEE Trans Eng Manag. 1989;36:132–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM. Managing the unexpected: resilient performance in an age of uncertainty. 2nd ed. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. PSNet. Culture of safety. January 2019. Online at: https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primers/primer/5/safety-culture.

  26. Chassin MR, Loeb JM. High-reliability health care: getting there from here. Milbank Q. 2013;91(3):459–90. Available online at: https://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/Chassin_and_Loeb_0913_final.pdf.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Gaba D, Fish K, Howard S. Crisis management in anesthesiology. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Helmreich RL, Merritt AC, Wilhelm JA. The evolution of crew resource management training in commercial aviation. Int J Aviat Psychol. 1999;9:19–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Leadership and crew resource management in high-reliability organizations: a competency framework for measuring behaviors. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317053301_Leadership_and_Crew_Resource_Management_in_High-Reliability_Organizations_A_Competency_Framework_for_Measuring_Behaviors. Accessed 12 Aug 2019.

  30. Jensen RS. Pilot judgement and crew resource management. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gaba DM, Howard SK, Fish KJ, et al. Simulation-based training in anesthesia crisis resource management (ACRM): a decade of experience. Simul Games. 2001;32(2):175–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sundstrom E, De Meuse KP, Futrell D. Work teams: applications and effectiveness. Am Psychol. 1990;45:120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To err is human: building a safer health system, vol. 6. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  34. World Health Organization. Patient safety curriculum guide: multi-professional edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Russ AL, Fairbanks RJ, Karsh B-T, et al. The science of human factors: separating fact from fiction. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22:802–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science. 2010;330(6004):686–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Woolley AW, Aggarwal I, Malone TW. Collective intelligence and group performance. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2015;24(6):420–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. MBTI® Basics. The Myers & Briggs Foundation. Online at: https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/home.htm?bhcp=1.

  39. Katzenbach JR, Smith DK. The wisdom of teams. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Developing and Sustaining High-Performance Work Teams. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/toolkits/pages/developingandsustaininghigh-performanceworkteams.aspx.

  41. Holzman RS, Cooper JB, Gaba DM, Philip JH, Small SD, Feinstein D. Anesthesia crisis resource management: real-life simulation training in operating room crises. J Clin Anesth. 1995;7:675–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad Manag Rev. 2001;26(3):356–76. at 357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Collins JC. Good to great: why some companies make the leap ... and others don’t. New York: HarperBusiness; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Institute of Medicine Committee on the Health Professions Education Summit. The core competencies needed for health care professionals. In: Greiner AC, Knebel E, editors. Health professions education: a bridge to quality. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003. p. 45–74.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, Burdick E, Demonaco HJ, Erickson JI, Bates DW. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. J Am Med Assoc. 1999;282:267–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Kvarnström S. Difficulties in collaboration: a critical incident study of interprofessional healthcare teamwork. J Interprof Care. 2008;22:191–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Pronovost PJ, Berenholtz S, Dorman T, et al. Improving communication in the ICU using daily goals. Crit Care. 2003;18:71–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Reason J. Human error. 1st ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1990.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. JCAHO. Sentinel Event Data 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Mazzocco K, Petitti DB, Fong KT, Bonacum D, Brookey J, Graham S, Thomas EJ. Surgical team behaviors and patient outcomes. Am J Surg. 2009;197:678–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wilson R, Runciman W, Gibbard R, Harrison B, Newby L, Hamilton J. The quality in Australian health care study. Med J Aust. 1995;163:458–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Stockwell DC, Slonim AD. Quality and safety in the intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Med. 2006;21:199–210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lyu H, Wick EC, Housman M, Freischlag JA, Makary MA. Patient satisfaction as a possible indicator of quality surgical care. J Am Med Assoc Surg. 2013;148:362–7.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Mardon RE, Khanna K, Sorra J, Dyer N, Famolaro T. Exploring relationships between hospital patient safety culture and adverse events. J Patient Saf. 2010;6:226–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery. 2003;133:614–21. https://doi.org/10.1067/msy.2003.169.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Jerry Mulenburg. Crew resource management improves decision making. INSIGHT|ASK MAGAZINE|11. Online at https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/546130main_42i_crew_resource_management.pdf.

  57. Lencioni P. The five dysfunctions of a team: a leadership fable. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Salas E, Sims DE, Burke CS. Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Res. 2005;36:555–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Stout RJ, Cannon-Bower JA, Salas E, et al. Planning, shared mental models, and coordinated performance: an empirical link is established. Hum Factors. 1999;41:61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Cass R. Sunstein, “The law of group polarization” (John M. Olin program in law and economics. Working Paper No. 91, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Kevin Kruse. What is leadership. Forbes. 2019 Forbes Media LLC. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2013/04/09/what-is-leadership/#71e0c7015b 90.

  62. Sammi Caramela. 4 ways to define leadership.Business News Daily. 2017. https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/3647-leadership-definition.html.

  63. Senge PM. The fifth discipline: the art & practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kouzes JM, Posner BZ. The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kouzes JM, Posner BZ. The five practices of exemplary leadership. Hoboken, NJ: Pfeiffer; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  66. James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner, credibility: how leaders gain and lose it, why people demand it. Revised Edition. Jossey-Bass; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Goleman D. Emotional intelligence: why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam Books; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Director, Surgical and Neurocritical Care Units, Rochester Regional Health System at Rochester General Hospital, Rochester, NY, USA

    James E. Szalados

  2. The Szalados Law Firm, Hilton, NY, USA

    James E. Szalados

Authors
  1. James E. Szalados
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James E. Szalados .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Director, Surgical and Neurocritical Care Units, Rochester Regional Health System at Rochester General Hospital, Rochester, NY, USA

    James E. Szalados

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Szalados, J.E. (2021). The Science of Teamwork in Healthcare: Importance to Patient Outcome. In: Szalados, J.E. (eds) The Medical-Legal Aspects of Acute Care Medicine. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68570-6_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68570-6_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-68569-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-68570-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation