Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Working Together in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Provider Perspectives

Journal of Perinatology volume 24, pages 552–559 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To elicit healthcare provider perceptions of working together in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

STUDY DESIGN: We conducted focus groups to elicit descriptions of how providers work together. The groups included one each of transport nurses, staff nurses, residents, fellows, attending physicians and two multiple provider groups. To identify themes and their descriptive elements we performed qualitative data analysis.

RESULTS: There were three to seven participants per group for a total sample of 36. Provider responses to questions about working together centered around three major themes: (1) Provider Characteristics; (2) Workplace Factors and; (3) Group Influences. Provider Characteristics were defined by personal attributes, reputation, and expertise. Workplace Factors included staffing, work organization, and work environment. Group Influences were described by communication and relationships.

CONCLUSIONS: Providers in this NICU described three broad organizational and interpersonal factors that influence how they work together, yet no consistent descriptions of teams or teamwork were found. The organizational factors, often far removed from bedside, should be considered when evaluating how providers work together.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To Err is Human. Building a Safer Health System. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Donchin Y, Gopher D, Olin M, et al. A look into the nature and causes of human errors in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 1995;23:294–300.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Perstein PH, Callison C, White M, Barnes B, Edwards NK . Errors in drug computations during newborn intensive care. Am J Dis Child 1979;133:376–379.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Raju TN, Kecskes S, Thornton JP, Perry M, Feldman S . Medication errors in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units. Lancet 1989;2:374–376.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Helmreich RL, Foushee HC . Why crew resource management: empirical and theoretical bases of human factors training in aviation. In: Wiener EL, Kanki BG, Helmreich RL, editors. Cockpit Resource Management. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Halamek LP, Kaegi DM, Gaba DM, et al. Time for a new paradigm in pediatric medical education: teaching neonatal resuscitation in a simulated delivery room environment. Pediatrics 2000;106:E45.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Thomas EJ, Helmreich RH . Will Airline Safety Models Work in Medicine?. In: Rosenthal M., Sutcliffe KM, editors. Medical Error. San Francisco: Josey Bass; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rubin H, Rubin I . Hearing about culture. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing the Data. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Morse J . Emerging from the data: the cognitive process of analysis in qualitative inquiry. In: Morse J., editor. Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1994 p. 23–43.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sexton BJ, Thomas EJ, Helmreich RL . Error, stress, and teamwork in medicine and aviation: cross sectional surveys. BMJ 2000;320:745–749.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mays N, Pope C . Qualitative research in health care: assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 2000;320:50–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Leape LL . Error in Medicine. JAMA 1994;272:1851–1857.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Helmreich RL, Merritt AC . Culture at Work: National, Organizational and Professional Influences. Aldershot: Ashgate; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Thomas EJ, Sexton BJ, Helmreich RL . Discrepant attitudes about teamwork among critical care nurses and physicians. Critical Care Med 2003;31:956–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Morey JC, Simon R, Jay GD, et al. Error reduction and performance improvement in the emergency department through formal teamwork training: evaluation results of the MedTeams project. Health Services Res 2002;37:1553–1581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gaba DM, Howard SK, Flanagan B, et al. Assessment of clinical performance during simulated crises using both technical and behavioral ratings. Anesthesiology 1998;89:3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Carthey J, de Leval MR, Wright DJ, Farewell VT, Reason JT . Behavioural markers of surgical excellence. Safety Sci 2003;41:409–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Thomas EJ, Sexton JM, Helmreich RL . Translating Teamwork Behaviors from Aviation to Healthcare: Development of The University of Texas Behavioral Markers for Neonatal Resuscitation. The University of Texas Center of Excellence for Patient Safety Research and Practice. Technical Report 03-01, 2003 (available at http://www.utpatientsafety.org/).

  19. Helmreich RL, Klinect JR, Wilhelm JA . Models of threat, error, and CRM in flight operations. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University; 1999 p. 677–682.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Eric J Thomas: Dr. Thomas is a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Generalist Physician Faculty Scholar.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston Medical School, and School of Nursing, TX, USA

    Eric J Thomas MD, MPH, Gwen D Sherwood RN, PhD, FAAN & Jennipher L Mulhollem MA

  2. The University of Texas at Department of Psychology and Human Factors Research Project, TX, USA

    J Bryan Sexton PhD & Robert L Helmreich PhD

  3. The University of Texas Center of Excellence for Patient Safety Research and Practice (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality grant # 1PO1HS1154401, TX, USA

    Eric J Thomas MD, MPH, Gwen D Sherwood RN, PhD, FAAN, Jennipher L Mulhollem MA, J Bryan Sexton PhD & Robert L Helmreich PhD

Authors
  1. Eric J Thomas MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gwen D Sherwood RN, PhD, FAAN
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennipher L Mulhollem MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J Bryan Sexton PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert L Helmreich PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The study was supported by a grant from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (#U18HS11164-01)

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

NICU Focus Group Interview Guide

  1. 1)

    Tell me your observations about how providers work together in NICU?

    1. a

      To give focus to the topic working together, use the process of admitting an infant to the NICU. Tell me the process and who is involved. Or use another process that comes to mind.

    2. b

      What is your role in getting a baby into the unit?

    3. c

      What influences the way you are able to carry out your role?

    4. d

      What happens when things go well in the admissions process?

    5. e

      What happens when things do not go well during the admissions process?

    6. f

      How do you compare/differentiate when things go well and when things do not go well?

    7. g

      What is essential for an admission to go smoothly?

  2. 2)

    What influences the way people work together?

    1. a

      What enhances the way people work together?

    2. b

      What limits the way people work together?

    3. c

      What behaviors help providers perform well?

  3. 3)

    How do you define collaboration among providers?

    1. a

      Are there other words that you could use besides collaboration?

    2. b

      When comparing when things go well and do not go well, what are your observations about collaboration in NICU?

    3. c

      When have you observed collaboration in NICU?

    4. d

      What happens when collaboration breaks down?

    5. e

      How does this influence care?

  4. 4)

    What other processes become important in describing how providers work together in NICU?

  5. 5)

    What other observations do you have about the way providers work together in NICU?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thomas, E., Sherwood, G., Mulhollem, J. et al. Working Together in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Provider Perspectives. J Perinatol 24, 552–559 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211136

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211136

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links