Team performance in resuscitation teams: comparison and critique of two recently developed scoring tools

Resuscitation. 2012 Dec;83(12):1478-83. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.04.015. Epub 2012 May 3.


Background and aim: Following high profile errors resulting in patient harm and attracting negative publicity, the healthcare sector has begun to focus on training non-technical teamworking skills as one way of reducing the rate of adverse events. Within the area of resuscitation, two tools have been developed recently aiming to assess these skills - TEAM and OSCAR. The aims of the study reported here were:

Methods: The study consisted of two phases - reliability assessment; and content comparison, and correlation. Assessments were made by two resuscitation experts, who watched 24 pre-recorded resuscitation simulations, and independently rated team behaviours using both tools. The tools were critically appraised, and correlation between overall score surrogates was assessed.

Results: Both OSCAR and TEAM achieved high levels of inter-rater reliability (in the form of adequate intra-class coefficients) and minor significant differences between Wilcoxon tests. Comparison of the scores from both tools demonstrated a high degree of correlation (and hence concurrent validity). Finally, critique of each tool highlighted differences in length and complexity.

Conclusion: Both OSCAR and TEAM can be used to assess resuscitation teams in a simulated environment, with the tools correlating well with one another. We envisage a role for both tools - with TEAM giving a quick, global assessment of the team, but OSCAR enabling more detailed breakdown of the assessment, facilitating feedback, and identifying areas of weakness for future training.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Clinical Competence* / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Observer Variation
  • Patient Care Team*
  • Resuscitation / standards*