Team decision-making in high-stakes time-pressured environments: what helps and what hinders?

IF 2
CJEM Pub Date : 2026-10-03 DOI:10.1007/s43678-026-01285-1
Fiona Raymond, Mitchell C Profeit, Andrew K Hall, Valentina Ly, Warren J Cheung
{"title":"Team decision-making in high-stakes time-pressured environments: what helps and what hinders?","authors":"Fiona Raymond, Mitchell C Profeit, Andrew K Hall, Valentina Ly, Warren J Cheung","doi":"10.1007/s43678-026-01285-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Team decision-making is central to effective practice in high-acuity healthcare environments, yet most decision-making research in medicine remains focused on individuals rather than teams. This narrative review synthesizes evidence across various fields, including aviation, military, crisis response, and team sport, to identify key factors that influence team decision-making in time-bound, high-stakes settings, and to examine how these insights may inform practice in acute care and resuscitation medicine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of MEDLINE and Scopus databases following previously identified best practices for narrative review identified 595 unique records; after review by the first and second authors, 25 studies met inclusion criteria and focused explicitly on team-level decisions made under conditions of time pressure and high stakes. Included studies spanned healthcare, emergency response, crisis management, aviation, sport, business, and military contexts. These studies were then analyzed by the first author and themes were identified.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Content analysis revealed five factors shaping team decision-making: role clarity, hierarchy, information sharing, team cognition, and team training. Across domains, clear and mutually understood roles have been shown to facilitate coordination, whereas role ambiguity resulted in conflict, redundancy, or unsafe task prioritization. Flexible, psychologically safe hierarchies, rather than rigid structures, enabled inclusive communication and reduced deference-based errors. Effective information sharing required both sufficiency and restraint, emphasizing relevance, timeliness, and shared situational awareness. Team cognition, including the development of shared mental models, was foundational for synchronizing actions under dynamic conditions. Finally, team training approaches that emphasize adaptability, cross-role understanding, pre-briefing, and debriefing cultivated resilience and improved decision accuracy under pressure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest opportunities to strengthen decision-making in acute care by prioritizing early role clarification, flattening communication pathways, and designing training that targets soft resilience, shared cognition, and adaptive communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":93937,"journal":{"name":"CJEM","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CJEM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-026-01285-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Team decision-making is central to effective practice in high-acuity healthcare environments, yet most decision-making research in medicine remains focused on individuals rather than teams. This narrative review synthesizes evidence across various fields, including aviation, military, crisis response, and team sport, to identify key factors that influence team decision-making in time-bound, high-stakes settings, and to examine how these insights may inform practice in acute care and resuscitation medicine.

Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE and Scopus databases following previously identified best practices for narrative review identified 595 unique records; after review by the first and second authors, 25 studies met inclusion criteria and focused explicitly on team-level decisions made under conditions of time pressure and high stakes. Included studies spanned healthcare, emergency response, crisis management, aviation, sport, business, and military contexts. These studies were then analyzed by the first author and themes were identified.

Results: Content analysis revealed five factors shaping team decision-making: role clarity, hierarchy, information sharing, team cognition, and team training. Across domains, clear and mutually understood roles have been shown to facilitate coordination, whereas role ambiguity resulted in conflict, redundancy, or unsafe task prioritization. Flexible, psychologically safe hierarchies, rather than rigid structures, enabled inclusive communication and reduced deference-based errors. Effective information sharing required both sufficiency and restraint, emphasizing relevance, timeliness, and shared situational awareness. Team cognition, including the development of shared mental models, was foundational for synchronizing actions under dynamic conditions. Finally, team training approaches that emphasize adaptability, cross-role understanding, pre-briefing, and debriefing cultivated resilience and improved decision accuracy under pressure.

Conclusion: These findings suggest opportunities to strengthen decision-making in acute care by prioritizing early role clarification, flattening communication pathways, and designing training that targets soft resilience, shared cognition, and adaptive communication.

高风险时间压力环境下的团队决策:什么是帮助,什么是阻碍?
目的:团队决策是在高灵敏度医疗环境中有效实践的核心,然而大多数医学决策研究仍然集中在个人而不是团队上。本文综合了航空、军事、危机应对和团队运动等各个领域的证据,以确定在有时限、高风险环境下影响团队决策的关键因素,并研究这些见解如何为急性护理和复苏医学实践提供信息。方法:系统检索MEDLINE和Scopus数据库,根据先前确定的叙事评论最佳实践,确定595条独特记录;经过第一和第二作者的审查,25项研究符合纳入标准,并明确关注在时间压力和高风险条件下做出的团队层面决策。包括医疗保健、应急响应、危机管理、航空、体育、商业和军事背景的研究。然后由第一作者对这些研究进行分析,并确定主题。结果:内容分析揭示了影响团队决策的5个因素:角色明晰、层级、信息共享、团队认知和团队培训。跨领域,清晰和相互理解的角色已被证明有助于协调,而角色模糊导致冲突、冗余或不安全的任务优先级。灵活的、心理上安全的等级制度,而不是僵化的结构,促成了包容性的沟通,减少了基于顺从的错误。有效的信息共享需要充分和克制,强调相关性、及时性和共享的态势感知。团队认知,包括共享心理模型的发展,是动态条件下同步行动的基础。最后,强调适应性、跨角色理解、事前简报和任务汇报的团队培训方法培养了弹性,提高了压力下的决策准确性。结论:这些研究结果表明,通过优先考虑早期角色澄清,平坦沟通途径,设计针对软弹性,共同认知和适应性沟通的培训,可以加强急性护理中的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书