↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of an interprofessional patient safety team-based learning simulation experience on healthcare professional trainees

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
292 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness of an interprofessional patient safety team-based learning simulation experience on healthcare professional trainees
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12909-018-1301-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nirvani Goolsarran, Carine E. Hamo, Susan Lane, Stacey Frawley, Wei-Hsin Lu

Abstract

Although the American Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates formal education in patient safety, there is a lack of standardized educational practice on how to conduct patient safety training. Traditionally, patient safety is taught utilizing instructional strategies that promote passive learning such as self-directed online learning modules or didactic lectures that result in suboptimal learning and satisfaction. During the summer of 2015, 76 trainees consisting of internal medicine interns and senior-level nursing students participated in an interactive patient safety workshop that used a flipped classroom approach integrating team based learning (TBL) and interprofessional simulated application exercises. Workshop trainees demonstrated an increase in knowledge specifically related to patient safety core concepts on the Team Readiness Assurance Test (TRAT) compared to the Individual Readiness Assurance Test (IRAT) (p = 0.001). Completion rates on the simulation application exercises checklists were high except for a few critical action items such as hand-washing, identifying barriers to care, and making efforts to clarify code status with patient. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) subscale scores for Teamwork and Collaboration and Professional Identity were higher on the post-workshop survey compared to the pre-workshop survey, however only the difference in the Positive Professional Identity subscale was statistically significant (p = 0.03). A majority (90%) of the trainees either agreed that the safety concepts they learned would likely improve the quality of care they provide to future patients. This novel approach to safety training expanded teaching outside of the classroom and integrated simulation and engagement in error reduction strategies. Next steps include direct observation of trainees in the clinical setting for team-based competency when it comes to patient safety and recognition of system errors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 292 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 292 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 11%
Student > Bachelor 26 9%
Researcher 25 9%
Lecturer 22 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 5%
Other 76 26%
Unknown 95 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 63 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 59 20%
Social Sciences 13 4%
Engineering 8 3%
Psychology 6 2%
Other 30 10%
Unknown 113 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2021.
All research outputs
#6,432,759
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,084
of 3,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,947
of 331,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#29
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,387 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,157 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.