19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Qualitative investigation of trace-based communication: how are traces conceptualised in healthcare teamwork?

      research-article
      1 , , 2
      BMJ Open
      BMJ Publishing Group
      quality in health care, qualitative research, medical education & training

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          This interview-based qualitative study aims to explore how healthcare providers conceptualise trace-based communication and considers its implications for how teams work. In the biological literature, trace-based communication refers to the non-verbal communication that is achieved by leaving ‘traces’ in the environment and other members sensing them and using them to drive their own behaviour. Trace-based communication is a key component of swam intelligence and has been described as a critical process that enables superorganisms to coordinate work and collectively adapt. This paper brings awareness to its existence in the context of healthcare teamwork.

          Design

          Interview-based study using Constructivist Grounded Theory methodology.

          Setting

          This study was conducted in multiple team contexts at one of Canada’s largest acute-care teaching hospitals.

          Participants

          25 clinicians from across professions and disciplines. Specialties included surgery, anesthesiology, psychiatry, internal medicine, geriatrics, neonatology, paramedics, nursing, intensive care, neurology and emergency medicine.

          Intervention

          Not relevant due to the qualitative nature of the study.

          Primary and secondary outcome

          Not relevant due to the qualitative nature of the study.

          Results

          The dataset was analysed using the sensitising concept of ‘traces’ from Swarm Intelligence. This study brought to light novel and unique elements of trace-based communication in the context of healthcare teamwork including focused intentionality, successful versus failed traces and the contextually bounded nature of the responses to traces. While participants initially felt ambivalent about the idea of using traces in their daily teamwork, they provided a variety of examples. Through these examples, participants revealed the multifaceted nature of the purposes of trace-based communication, including promoting efficiency, preventing mistakes and saving face.

          Conclusions

          This study demonstrated that clinicians pervasively use trace-based communication despite differences in opinion as to its implications for teamwork and safety. Other disciplines have taken up traces to promote collective adaptation. This should serve as inspiration to at least start exploring this phenomenon in healthcare.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Book: not found

          Constructing Grounded Theory

          <p>Lecturers, request your electronic inspection copy<br> <br> Kathy Charmaz presents the definitive guide to doing grounded theory from a constructivist perspective. This second edition of her groundbreaking text retains the accessibility and warmth of the first edition whilst introducing cutting edge examples and practical tips.<br> <br> This expanded second edition:<br> <br> - explores how to effectively focus on data collection<br> <br> - demonstrates how to use data for theorizing<br> <br> - adds two new chapters that guide you through conducting and analysing interviews in grounded theory <br> <br> - adds a new chapter on symbolic interactionism and grounded theory<br> <br> - considers recent epistemological debates about the place of prior theory<br> <br> - discusses the legacy of Anselm Strauss for grounded theory.</p> <p>This is a seminal title for anyone serious about understanding and doing grounded theory research. </p>
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Member Checking

            The trustworthiness of results is the bedrock of high quality qualitative research. Member checking, also known as participant or respondent validation, is a technique for exploring the credibility of results. Data or results are returned to participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences. Member checking is often mentioned as one in a list of validation techniques. This simplistic reporting might not acknowledge the value of using the method, nor its juxtaposition with the interpretative stance of qualitative research. In this commentary, we critique how member checking has been used in published research, before describing and evaluating an innovative in-depth member checking technique, Synthesized Member Checking. The method was used in a study with patients diagnosed with melanoma. Synthesized Member Checking addresses the co-constructed nature of knowledge by providing participants with the opportunity to engage with, and add to, interview and interpreted data, several months after their semi-structured interview.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries?

              I Coyne (1997)
              Sampling is a very complex issue in qualitative research as there are many variations of qualitative sampling described in the literature and much confusion and overlapping of types of sampling, particularly in the case of purposeful and theoretical sampling. The terms purposeful and theoretical are viewed synonomously and used interchangeably in the literature. Many of the most frequent misinterpretations relate to the disparate meanings and usage of the terminology. It is important that the terminology is examined so that underlying assumptions be made more explicit. Lack of shared meanings and terminology in the nursing discourse creates confusion for the neophyte researcher and increases the production of studies with weak methodologies. This paper analyses critically purposeful and theoretical sampling and offers clarification on the use of theoretical sampling for nursing research. The aim is not to make prescriptive statements on sampling; rather, to enhance understanding of the differences between purposeful and theoretical sampling for nursing research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2020
                4 November 2020
                : 10
                : 11
                : e038406
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Education and Centre for Education Research & Innovation , Western University , London, Ontario, Canada
                [2 ]departmentCentre for Education Research & Innovation , Western University , London, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Sayra Cristancho; sayra.cristancho@ 123456schulich.uwo.ca
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8738-2130
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-038406
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038406
                7643497
                33148735
                fc5f55de-9353-4df3-bab3-63e61343aa88
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 10 March 2020
                : 05 October 2020
                : 17 October 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Physicians Services Incorporated Foundation;
                Award ID: Health Research Grant category (no grant number)
                Categories
                Qualitative Research
                1506
                1725
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                quality in health care,qualitative research,medical education & training
                Medicine
                quality in health care, qualitative research, medical education & training

                Comments

                Comment on this article