Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Crew resource management training in the intensive care unit. A multisite controlled before–after study
  1. Peter F Kemper1,
  2. Martine de Bruijne1,
  3. Cathy van Dyck2,
  4. Ralph L So3,
  5. Peter Tangkau4,
  6. Cordula Wagner1,5
  1. 1Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Organisational Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  3. 3Department of Intensive Care, Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
  4. 4Department of Intensive Care, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands
  5. 5The Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Peter F Kemper, Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van de Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam 1081 BT, The Netherlands; p.kemper{at}


Introduction There is a growing awareness today that adverse events in the intensive care unit (ICU) are more often caused by problems related to non-technical skills than by a lack of technical, or clinical, expertise. Team training, such as crew resource management (CRM), aims to improve these non-technical skills. The present study evaluated the effectiveness of CRM in the ICU.

Methods Six ICUs participated in a paired controlled trial, with one pretest and two post-test measurements (after 3 and 12 months). Three ICUs received CRM training and were compared with a matched control unit. The 2-day classroom-based training was delivered to multidisciplinary groups (ie, ICU physicians, nurses, managers). All levels of Kirkpatrick's evaluation framework were assessed using a mixed method design, including questionnaires, observations and routinely administered patient outcome data.

Results Level I—reaction: participants were very positive directly after the training. Level II—learning: attitudes towards behaviour aimed at optimising situational awareness were relatively high at baseline and remained stable. Level III—behaviour: self-reported behaviour aimed at optimising situational awareness improved in the intervention group. No changes were found in observed explicit professional oral communication. Level IV—organisation: patient outcomes were unaffected. Error management culture and job satisfaction improved in the intervention group. Patient safety culture improved in both control and intervention units.

Conclusions We can conclude that CRM, as delivered in the present study, does not change behaviour or patient outcomes by itself, yet changes how participants think about errors and risks. This indicates that CRM requires a combination with other initiatives in order to improve clinical outcomes.

  • Crew resource management
  • Team training
  • Medical education
  • Patient safety
  • Safety culture

Statistics from

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.

Linked Articles

  • Editorial
    Peter McCulloch