先天性畸形新生儿复苏中团队文化和学习型组织的调查:单中心经验

IF 2.4 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Resuscitation plus Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100877
Anna Bostwick , Anne Ades , Carolina Rodriguez-Paras , Madeline Dombroski , Charis Lim , Maria Ordoñez Paredes , Lauren Heimall , Leane Soorikian , Sara C. Handley , Heidi M. Herrick
{"title":"先天性畸形新生儿复苏中团队文化和学习型组织的调查:单中心经验","authors":"Anna Bostwick ,&nbsp;Anne Ades ,&nbsp;Carolina Rodriguez-Paras ,&nbsp;Madeline Dombroski ,&nbsp;Charis Lim ,&nbsp;Maria Ordoñez Paredes ,&nbsp;Lauren Heimall ,&nbsp;Leane Soorikian ,&nbsp;Sara C. Handley ,&nbsp;Heidi M. Herrick","doi":"10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>Delivery room resuscitation of neonates with congenital anomalies is complex. This study aimed to assess survey psychometrics and measure learning organization culture among resuscitation team members in a pediatric hospital delivery room dedicated to neonates with congenital anomalies.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We administered the Short-Form Learning Organization Survey with the addition of an open-ended question to all delivery room resuscitation team members from 5/2023 to 7/2023. Psychometric properties were assessed to confirm the survey’s reliability and validity in the delivery room context. Total and subscale scores were calculated, and differences were assessed by clinical role. The open-ended qualitative data were analyzed using an inductive approach and coded for theme and valence (positive, negative, neutral).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The response rate was 52% (159/307) with all roles represented. Psychometric assessment produced a 25-item survey with high reliability and validity. There were no differences in total scores across roles. Nurses had higher scores compared to attending physicians (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) and advanced practice providers (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) for the supportive learning environment subscale, and advanced practice providers (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) for the training subscale after multiple comparisons adjustment. Qualitative analysis revealed seven themes: time constraint, environment, adequate staffing, different opinions, care deviations, leadership, and training. Valence analysis showed variation by role, with more positive nursing responses.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The refined 25-item Short-Form Learning Organization Survey is a reliable and valid measure of learning organization culture for neonatal resuscitation teams. Differences in subscale scores and qualitative valence across roles highlight opportunities to improve interprofessional learning organization and team culture.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94192,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation plus","volume":"22 ","pages":"Article 100877"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A survey of team culture and learning organization in the resuscitation of neonates with congenital anomalies: A single center experience\",\"authors\":\"Anna Bostwick ,&nbsp;Anne Ades ,&nbsp;Carolina Rodriguez-Paras ,&nbsp;Madeline Dombroski ,&nbsp;Charis Lim ,&nbsp;Maria Ordoñez Paredes ,&nbsp;Lauren Heimall ,&nbsp;Leane Soorikian ,&nbsp;Sara C. Handley ,&nbsp;Heidi M. Herrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100877\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>Delivery room resuscitation of neonates with congenital anomalies is complex. This study aimed to assess survey psychometrics and measure learning organization culture among resuscitation team members in a pediatric hospital delivery room dedicated to neonates with congenital anomalies.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We administered the Short-Form Learning Organization Survey with the addition of an open-ended question to all delivery room resuscitation team members from 5/2023 to 7/2023. Psychometric properties were assessed to confirm the survey’s reliability and validity in the delivery room context. Total and subscale scores were calculated, and differences were assessed by clinical role. The open-ended qualitative data were analyzed using an inductive approach and coded for theme and valence (positive, negative, neutral).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The response rate was 52% (159/307) with all roles represented. Psychometric assessment produced a 25-item survey with high reliability and validity. There were no differences in total scores across roles. Nurses had higher scores compared to attending physicians (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) and advanced practice providers (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) for the supportive learning environment subscale, and advanced practice providers (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05) for the training subscale after multiple comparisons adjustment. Qualitative analysis revealed seven themes: time constraint, environment, adequate staffing, different opinions, care deviations, leadership, and training. Valence analysis showed variation by role, with more positive nursing responses.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The refined 25-item Short-Form Learning Organization Survey is a reliable and valid measure of learning organization culture for neonatal resuscitation teams. Differences in subscale scores and qualitative valence across roles highlight opportunities to improve interprofessional learning organization and team culture.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resuscitation plus\",\"volume\":\"22 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100877\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resuscitation plus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520425000141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520425000141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的先天性畸形新生儿的产房复苏是复杂的。本研究旨在评估儿科医院先天性异常新生儿产房复苏团队成员的调查心理测量学和学习组织文化。方法我们于2023年5月至2023年7月对所有产房复苏小组成员进行了简短的学习组织调查,并增加了一个开放式问题。评估心理测量特性以确认调查在产房环境中的信度和效度。计算总分和亚量表得分,并根据临床角色评估差异。采用归纳法对开放式定性数据进行分析,并对主题和效价(积极、消极、中性)进行编码。结果应答率为52%(159/307)。心理测量评估产生了一份25项的高信度和效度调查。不同角色的总得分没有差异。护士的得分高于主治医生(p <;0.01)和高级执业医师(p <;支持性学习环境子量表和高级实践提供者(p <;经多次比较调整后,训练子量表的差异为0.05)。定性分析揭示了七个主题:时间限制、环境、足够的人员配备、不同的意见、关心偏差、领导和培训。效价分析显示角色差异,积极护理反应较多。结论改进后的25项学习型组织调查表是衡量新生儿复苏团队学习型组织文化的一种可靠、有效的方法。不同角色在子量表得分和质性效价上的差异,突出了改善跨专业学习型组织和团队文化的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A survey of team culture and learning organization in the resuscitation of neonates with congenital anomalies: A single center experience

Aim

Delivery room resuscitation of neonates with congenital anomalies is complex. This study aimed to assess survey psychometrics and measure learning organization culture among resuscitation team members in a pediatric hospital delivery room dedicated to neonates with congenital anomalies.

Methods

We administered the Short-Form Learning Organization Survey with the addition of an open-ended question to all delivery room resuscitation team members from 5/2023 to 7/2023. Psychometric properties were assessed to confirm the survey’s reliability and validity in the delivery room context. Total and subscale scores were calculated, and differences were assessed by clinical role. The open-ended qualitative data were analyzed using an inductive approach and coded for theme and valence (positive, negative, neutral).

Results

The response rate was 52% (159/307) with all roles represented. Psychometric assessment produced a 25-item survey with high reliability and validity. There were no differences in total scores across roles. Nurses had higher scores compared to attending physicians (p < 0.01) and advanced practice providers (p < 0.05) for the supportive learning environment subscale, and advanced practice providers (p < 0.05) for the training subscale after multiple comparisons adjustment. Qualitative analysis revealed seven themes: time constraint, environment, adequate staffing, different opinions, care deviations, leadership, and training. Valence analysis showed variation by role, with more positive nursing responses.

Conclusion

The refined 25-item Short-Form Learning Organization Survey is a reliable and valid measure of learning organization culture for neonatal resuscitation teams. Differences in subscale scores and qualitative valence across roles highlight opportunities to improve interprofessional learning organization and team culture.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Resuscitation plus
Resuscitation plus Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
期刊最新文献
Young ERC Resuscitation Science Masterclass Journal Club article: the ARREST trial Preparedness deserts: a framework for understanding and addressing geographic inequities in bystander response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest Patient and arrest characteristics associated with rearrest and mortality following out of hospital cardiac arrest Characterization of external defibrillator output and its impact on defibrillation protection of medical equipment Corrective steps during neonatal mask ventilation – a narrative review of the evidence behind the MR SOPA acronym
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1