You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Narrative review
Filming for auditing of real-life emergency teams: a systematic review
  1. Lise Brogaard1,
  2. Niels Uldbjerg2
  1. 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Regionshospitalet Horsens, Horsens, Denmark
  2. 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
  1. Correspondence to Dr Lise Brogaard; lbrj{at}clin.au.dk

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2018-000588

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Delivering high-quality emergency care is the ambition for every emergency team. To succeed requires not only that the individual provider is well trained; it also commands a rapid and coordinated team effort.1 2 However, performance often falls short of expectations.3–5 Therefore, strategies like simulation training, audits, feedback and debriefings have been studied.6–10 Furthermore, filming of emergency teams was introduced back in 1969.11 Filming makes it possible to review and analyse the performance in detail.12–14 Despite the widespread availability and acceptability of video as a method for auditing and quality improvement in healthcare today,15 16 it is still not used by the majority of emergency teams.17

    This review describes current evidence for video review to audit emergency teams’management of real-lifepatients. Video review is defined in this manuscript as any assessment, evaluation or audit where video is used

    The key questions in this systematic review are

    1. Where has video review been used; populations and settings?

    2. How has video review been used; technical solutions, legal and ethical issues?

    3. What is the evidence that video review improves patient care?

    Methods

    This systematic review used the protocol for systematic reviews (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols).18 The full study protocol in registered with PROSPERO.

    Eligibility criteria

    The eligibility criteria were based on the PICOS (Population, Intervention, Control, Outcome and Study design) guideline.19

    Population was resuscitation teams, code teams, emergency teams, trauma teams, rapid response teams in hospitals.

    Intervention was video review.

    Control/comparison was non-exposed teams.

    Outcome was any assessment of the team’s performance and/or patient outcome.

    Study designs eligible for inclusion include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (non-RCTs, interrupted time series, controlled before-and-after studies, cohort studies) and cross-sectional studies. Studies of single case reports and unpublished studies (eg, conference abstract …

    View Full Text