BackgroundCardiac arrests are handled by teams rather than by individual health-care workers. Recent investigations demonstrate that adherence to CPR guidelines can be less than optimal, that deviations from treatment algorithms are associated with lower survival rates, and that deficits in performance are associated with shortcomings in the process of team-building. The aim of this study was to explore and quantify the effects of ad-hoc team-building on the adherence to the algorithms of CPR among two types of physicians that play an important role as first responders during CPR: general practitioners and hospital physicians.MethodsTo unmask team-building this prospective randomised study compared the performance of preformed teams, i.e. teams that had undergone their process of team-building prior to the onset of a cardiac arrest, with that of teams that had to form ad-hoc during the cardiac arrest. 50 teams consisting of three general practitioners each and 50 teams consisting of three hospital physicians each, were randomised to two different versions of a simulated witnessed cardiac arrest: the arrest occurred either in the presence of only one physician while the remaining two physicians were summoned to help ("ad-hoc"), or it occurred in the presence of all three physicians ("preformed"). All scenarios were videotaped and performance was analysed post-hoc by two independent observers.ResultsCompared to preformed teams, ad-hoc forming teams had less hands-on time during the first 180 seconds of the arrest (93 ± 37 vs. 124 ± 33 sec, P < 0.0001), delayed their first defibrillation (67 ± 42 vs. 107 ± 46 sec, P < 0.0001), and made less leadership statements (15 ± 5 vs. 21 ± 6, P < 0.0001).ConclusionHands-on time and time to defibrillation, two performance markers of CPR with a proven relevance for medical outcome, are negatively affected by shortcomings in the process of ad-hoc team-building and particularly deficits in leadership. Team-building has thus to be regarded as an additional task imposed on teams forming ad-hoc during CPR. All physicians should be aware that early structuring of the own team is a prerequisite for timely and effective execution of CPR.

Medical algorithms, technical skills, and repeated training are the classical cornerstones for successful cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Increasing evidence suggests that human factors, including team interaction, communication, and leadership, also influence the performance of CPR. Guidelines, however, do not yet include these human factors, partly because of the difficulties of their measurement in real-life cardiac arrest. Recently, clinical studies of cardiac arrest scenarios with high-fidelity video-assisted simulations have provided opportunities to better delineate the influence of human factors on resuscitation team performance. This review focuses on evidence from simulator studies that focus on human factors and their influence on the performance of resuscitation teams. Similar to studies in real patients, simulated cardiac arrest scenarios revealed many unnecessary interruptions of CPR as well as significant delays in defibrillation. These studies also showed that human factors play a major role in these shortcomings and that the medical performance depends on the quality of leadership and team-structuring. Moreover, simulated video-taped medical emergencies revealed that a substantial part of information transfer during communication is erroneous. Understanding the impact of human factors on the performance of a complex medical intervention like resuscitation requires detailed, second-by-second, analysis of factors involving the patient, resuscitative equipment such as the defibrillator, and all team members. Thus, high-fidelity simulator studies provide an important research method in this challenging field.

No abstract

No abstract