EM · Trauma team leadership
Trauma team leadership
The trauma team activation, composition and leadership: the pre-arrival briefing, the paramedic MIST handover, the allocated roles, the standing-back team leader who directs the primary survey, the decision points of theatre versus CT, the crisis resource management, and the post-trauma debrief.
On this page & tools
Your progress
Saved locally on this device.
Target exams
Red flags
The trauma resuscitation is the most team-intensive operation in the emergency department, and the quality of its leadership and its coordination determines the outcome as much as the clinical interventions. The trauma team is activated by the pre-hospital notification, assembled before the patient arrives, briefed with the allocated roles, and led through the primary survey by a single team leader who stands back and directs. The Fellowship candidate must know the activation criteria, the team composition, the paramedic handover, the role of the leader, and the decision points that the leader makes — the theatre versus the computed tomography, the escalation, and the termination.[3][4]
Trauma team activation
The trauma team is activated by the pre-hospital notification, based on the activation criteria that are set by the institution and the trauma service. The criteria are physiological (a heart rate above 120, a systolic blood pressure below 90, a respiratory rate above 30 or below 10, a GCS below 13), anatomical (a penetrating injury to the head, the neck, the torso or the proximal limb, a flail chest, a pelvic fracture, an amputation, a paralysis), and mechanistic (a high-speed motor-vehicle collision, a fall from a significant height, a pedestrian struck, a motorcycle crash, an explosion). The pre-hospital provider gives the MIST handover — the Mechanism, the Injuries identified, the Signs and the symptoms, the Treatment given — which is brief, structured, and taken before the patient is moved to the trolley.[3]
The activation criteria are deliberately weighted for sensitivity over specificity — the trauma team that is over-activated is a team that is occasionally wasted; the trauma team that is under-activated is a team that is too often late, and the late team is the patient who deteriorates alone. Most mature trauma systems accept an over-triage rate of 25 to 50 per cent and treat an under-triage rate above five per cent as a sentinel event. The criteria are stratified into the full team activation (the immediately life-threatening) and the modified or single-responder activation (the potentially serious), and the pre-hospital provider triggers one or the other from the field.[9][12]
[12]Physiological
- The most reliable — the derangement is already present
- SBP below 90 mmHg, GCS below 13, RR below 10 or above 29
- Heart rate above 120 in the adult, age-adjusted in the child and the elderly
- Any single criterion triggers the full team activation
Anatomical
- Inherently life- or limb-threatening regardless of the numbers
- Penetrating injury to the head, neck, torso or proximal limb
- Flail chest, two or more long-bone fractures, unstable pelvic fracture
- Amputation proximal to the wrist or ankle; paralysis; burns over 20 per cent body-surface area
Mechanistic
- High-energy transfer — may have produced an occult injury
- Fall over twice the patient height or from above 3 metres
- High-speed motor-vehicle collision, ejection, rollover, death in the same vehicle
- Pedestrian or cyclist struck, motorcycle crash, blast, extrication over 20 min — least specific, designed for sensitivity
Co-morbidity
- The reduced physiological reserve converts a minor mechanism into a major injury
- Age over 65, the anticoagulant or antiplatelet, the pregnant patient
- The dialysis-dependent, the cirrhotic, the immunosuppressed
- Lower the threshold for activation — the SBP of 110 in the eighty-year-old on a beta-blocker is already shock
Kelleher (JAMA Surgery 2016) — trauma team activation level and outcome
The pre-arrival window — the minute that defines the resus
The interval between the pre-hospital notification and the patient's arrival is the most underused minute in the trauma resuscitation. The team leader uses it to convert the activation call into a structured preparation: the roles are read aloud and acknowledged, the equipment is checked (the airway trolley, the suction, the difficult-airway adjuncts, the chest-drain tray, the pelvic binder, the warming device), the blood bank is warned, the radiographer is positioned, the scribe opens the timeline, and the predicted injuries are named so that each role anticipates its task. The team that arrives unprepared is the team that improvises under pressure; the team that is briefed in the pre-arrival minute is the team that executes the primary survey in parallel from the moment the patient crosses the door.[3][9]
Team composition and the pre-arrival briefing
The trauma team has allocated roles, assigned at the pre-arrival briefing before the patient reaches the department. The team leader stands at the foot of the bed and directs; the airway doctor manages the airway and the cervical spine; the team nurse manages the access, the monitoring and the drugs; the surgeon is present for the abdominal or the thoracic intervention; the radiographer is ready for the chest and the pelvic films; the scribe records the interventions and the timeline; and the runner fetches the equipment and the blood products. The team is briefed on the expected injuries, the equipment is checked, the blood products are ordered, and the roles are confirmed.[3][4]
The ATLS framework codifies the trauma team as a set of named positions around the bed, each with a defined responsibility and a defined reporting line to the team leader. The strength of the structure is that it eliminates the ambiguity — at any moment, every member knows what they are doing, what the leader is expecting of them, and where the information flows. The Fellowship candidate must be able to draw the team around the bed and name each position's domain.[3][9]
The ATLS trauma team — who stands where, and who does what
Team leader
Stands at the foot of the bed, hands off the patient, eyes on the monitor and the team. Calls the structured assessments, allocates the tasks, hears the findings aloud, and makes the disposition (theatre, CT, angiography, transfer). The only person who holds the global picture and the only person who makes the disposition decision.
Airway doctor
Head of the bed. Manual in-line stabilisation of the cervical spine, airway assessment, suction, the adjuncts, and the rapid-sequence induction and intubation. The surgical airway (cricothyroidotomy) if the airway is lost. Confirms the endotracheal tube and the gastric tube position.
Breathing doctor
Right chest. Assesses the chest, applies the oxygen, performs the needle decompression and the intercostal drain for the tension and the haemothorax, and auscultates after the intubation to confirm the tube and the bilateral air entry.
Circulation / procedure doctor
Left side. Two large-bore cannulae, the bloods, the venous gas and the lactate, the FAST scan, the pelvic binder, the fractured-limb splintage, and the Foley catheter if not contraindicated. Runs the massive transfusion protocol under the leader.
Surgical registrar
Stands ready for the chest drain, the pericardiocentesis, the resuscitative thoracotomy, the FAST-directed laparotomy decision, and the wound exploration. The surgical presence in the room is the system's hedge against the deterioration that demands the immediate operative source control.
Anaesthetist
Supports the airway induction, the drug preparation, the vasopressor and the sedation, the ventilation settings, and the difficult-airway fallback. Carries the second pair of hands for the rapid-sequence induction when the airway is challenging.
Primary nurse (team nurse)
Manages the access, the monitoring, the drugs, the oxygen, and the documentation. Coordinates the blood-product delivery, the warming, and the specimen handling. Often the most experienced person in the room — a critical source of the tacit information for the leader.
Radiographer
The supine chest and pelvis films during the primary survey, the FAST, and the coordination of the whole-body CT when the disposition decision is made. The portable films are taken without moving the patient off the resus trolley.
Scribe
Records the timeline, the interventions, the drugs, the doses, the vitals at fixed intervals, and the decision points. The scribe frees the leader from the documentation load and produces the legal record that reconstructs the resuscitation in sequence.
Runner
Fetches the equipment, the blood products, the drugs, and the specialty help. The role that prevents the senior staff from leaving the bedside — every minute the leader leaves the room is a minute the resus loses its coordinator.
The pre-arrival briefing — the leader's first spoken act
The pre-arrival briefing is the leader's first spoken act of the resuscitation, and it sets the tone and the structure for everything that follows. The leader stands at the foot of the empty bed, names each member by their role (not by their name — the role is the contract), confirms the expected mechanism and the predicted injuries, allocates the immediate tasks, names the blood-product status, and explicitly invites the questions and the concerns. The briefing is brief — under sixty seconds — and it ends with a clear "any questions before the patient arrives?" The team that is briefed is the team that executes in parallel; the team that is not briefed is the team that improvises in series, and the serial trauma resus is the slow trauma resus.[5][9]
The role of the team leader
The team leader's role is to stand back and maintain the situational awareness, not to perform the procedures. The leader who intubates or who inserts the chest drain loses the overview of the patient, the team, and the environment. The leader receives the paramedic handover, directs the primary survey step by step (the C, the A, the B, the C, the D, the E), names the next intervention, ensures that every instruction is acknowledged and confirmed, calls the decision points (the theatre or the CT, the escalation, the transfer), calls for the specialty help early (the neurosurgery, the orthopaedics, the interventional radiology), and periodically summarises the situation aloud so that the whole team shares the mental model.[1][3]
The MIST handover — the structured paramedic-to-team transfer
The paramedic handover is the formal transfer of the care, the information and the responsibility from the pre-hospital provider to the trauma team, and it is taken before the patient is moved to the trolley. The patient who is transferred to the bed before the handover is the patient whose handover is lost — the team is suddenly busy with the lines and the monitors, the paramedic is sidelined, and the mechanism and the pre-hospital course that guided the activation are never heard. The team leader takes the handover at the foot of the bed, faces the paramedic, listens without interruption, and only then directs the transfer.[3][9]
The MIST structure is the standardised mnemonic that delivers the pre-hospital information in under thirty seconds:[12]
The MIST handover — the four elements, in order
M — Mechanism
The mechanism of the injury in one phrase — the high-speed motor-vehicle collision with the ejection, the fall from three metres onto concrete, the stab wound to the left chest, the crush injury to the pelvis. The mechanism predicts the pattern of the injury and guides the team's expectation — the ejection primes the surgical team for the intra-abdominal bleed, the crush primes the orthopaedic and the renal team for the rhabdomyolysis.
I — Injuries identified
The obvious injuries the pre-hospital provider has identified — the open femur fracture, the degloved hand, the penetrating chest wound, the GCS of 8 at the scene. The injuries are listed, not interpreted — the paramedic reports what was seen, the team interprets.
S — Signs and symptoms
The vital signs at the scene and the trend en route — the heart rate, the blood pressure, the respiratory rate, the oxygen saturation, the GCS, and the response to the intervention. The trend is the critical element — the blood pressure that was 110 at the scene and is 70 on arrival is the patient in uncontrolled haemorrhage.
T — Treatment given
The interventions performed and the drugs given — the tourniquet at the thigh, the pelvic binder, the two large-bore cannulae, the 500 millilitres of saline, the 1 gram of tranexamic acid, the naloxone, the oxygen at 15 litres. The treatment given is the baseline against which the team measures its own resuscitation.
Variants — the ATMIST, the IMIST-AMBO, the SBAR
Several trauma systems use the extended mnemonics that add the time and the age to the front. The ATMIST adds the Age and the Time of the injury; the IMIST-AMBO (Identify, Mechanism, Injuries, Signs, Treatments — Age, Mechanism, Background, Other) is used in some Australian services; the SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) is the general healthcare handover that structures the recommendation explicitly. The Fellowship candidate should know the MIST as the primary and recognise the others as the regional variants — the principle is the same: the structured, brief, pre-movement handover that delivers the mechanism, the injuries, the signs and the treatments in under thirty seconds.[9]
The decision points
The team leader makes the decision points that determine the patient's path. The theatre versus the computed tomography decision is the critical one: the unstable patient (hypotensive despite resuscitation, or with a positive FAST and the ongoing bleeding) goes to the operating theatre for the damage-control surgery, not to the scanner. The stable patient goes to the whole-body CT and returns for the definitive management. The leader also decides on the transfer (the retrieval to the tertiary trauma centre, the activation of the helicopter), the escalation (the massive transfusion protocol, the REBOA, the resuscitative thoracotomy), and the termination of the resuscitation when it is futile. Each decision is communicated to the team, the rationale is stated, and the plan is confirmed.[3][4]
Each decision the leader makes is announced aloud, the rationale is given, and the team is invited to challenge it — the disposition decision is a physiology decision (the trend of the blood pressure, the lactate, the response to the resuscitation), not an anatomy decision (the CT appearance of the injury). The leader who decides on the anatomy alone sends the wrong patient to the wrong place; the leader who decides on the physiology sends the bleeding patient to the theatre and the stabilised patient to the scanner.[3][9]
To the operating theatre
- The unstable patient — the physiology declares the source control
- SBP below 90 despite 1 to 2 L of crystalloid and the blood-product resuscitation
- The positive FAST in the shocked patient with the ongoing transfusion requirement
- Damage-control surgery: the bleeding and the contamination controlled, the definitive repair deferred
To the CT scanner
- The stable or the stabilised patient — the physiology tolerates the imaging
- The whole-body CT (head-to-pelvis) is the definitive imaging of the polytrauma
- The patient who needs the scanner must have a secure airway, a controlled breathing, and a stable circulation
- Never the second scan in the bleeding patient — the scan you die on
To the angiography suite
- The pelvic fracture with the contrast extravasation on the CT — the arterial blush
- The solid-organ injury managed non-operatively with the ongoing transfusion
- The embolisation of the internal iliac, the splenic, the hepatic arterial branches
- Requires the haemodynamically stable patient — the unstable goes to the theatre first
The escalation in the bay
- The massive transfusion protocol, the REBOA for the refractory pelvic or intra-abdominal bleed
- The resuscitative thoracotomy for the arrest after the penetrating torso trauma
- The cross-clamp of the descending aorta and the relief of the pericardial tamponade
- The decision that the patient will not survive the transfer to the theatre
Crisis resource management
The crisis resource management principles apply to the trauma team as they do to any resuscitation: the leadership, the communication, the resource management, and the situational awareness.[1] The fixation error — anchoring on a diagnosis despite the contradictory evidence — is particularly dangerous in the multi-injured patient, where the dramatic injury (the open fracture) can distract from the lethal one (the intra-abdominal bleed). The closed-loop communication (the directed instruction, the acknowledgement, the confirmation) prevents the silent assumption. The team leader who explicitly invites the dissent and the question ("does anyone see anything I am missing?") is the leader who hears the critical observation. The systematic review of the resuscitation training confirms that the simulation-based practice of the team competencies improves the team performance.[2]
Crisis resource management (CRM) is the body of knowledge — borrowed from the aviation and the anaesthesia communities — that addresses the non-technical skills of the resuscitation: the leadership, the communication, the teamwork, the resource management, and the situational awareness. The technical skills save the patient; the non-technical skills prevent the technical skills from failing. The CRM failures — the unacknowledged instruction, the unspoken concern, the fixation on the wrong diagnosis, the leadership that does not hear — are the failures behind the majority of the trauma morbidity and mortality, more than the missed injury or the procedural error.[6][7]
The four pillars of CRM
The CRM is conventionally taught as four pillars, each of which the trauma team leader must actively practise and visibly model:[4]
The four pillars of crisis resource management
Leadership and followership
A single, named leader who directs and a team that follows. The leader allocates the roles, makes the decisions, and bears the responsibility. The followers execute their allocated tasks, report back, and escalate the concerns. The ambiguous leadership — the two consultants who both direct — is the fragmentation of the command.
Communication
The closed-loop communication: the directed call by name, the acknowledgement by repeat, the confirmation by report-back, the closure by the leader. The structured handovers (MIST, SBAR). The read-back of the drugs and the doses. The explicit invitation of the question and the dissent.
Situational awareness
The continuous construction of the mental model — the patient, the team, the environment, the trajectory. The periodic aloud summary that re-establishes the shared model. The formal time-out that breaks the fixation and re-examines the assumptions.
Resource management
The allocation of the people, the equipment, the blood products and the rooms. The anticipation of the next step — the theatre is warned, the angiography is warned, the intensive care is warned. The runner who fetches and frees the seniors.
Closed-loop communication — the order that is never given
The closed-loop communication is the discipline that prevents the silent assumption — the instruction that is issued but not heard, the dose that is drawn but not given, the drug that is given but not recorded. The loop has four steps, and the loop is not closed until the leader acknowledges:[5]
The closed-loop communication — the four-step loop
1. The directed call
The leader calls the recipient by name or by role and states the intervention, the drug, and the dose: "Airway doctor, give tranexamic acid one gram intravenously now."
2. The read-back
The recipient repeats the instruction verbatim to confirm the hearing: "Tranexamic acid one gram intravenously, starting now." The read-back is the check that the message received is the message sent.
3. The report-back
When the intervention is complete, the recipient reports the completion with the time: "Tranexamic acid one gram given at fourteen twenty-three." The report-back is the confirmation that the action happened.
4. The acknowledgement
The leader acknowledges the report-back and closes the loop: "Thank you, tranexamic acid one gram at fourteen twenty-three, recorded." The loop is closed only when the leader acknowledges — the unacknowledged report is the loop left open.
Inquiry, advocacy and assertion — flattening the authority gradient
The authority gradient is the unspoken hierarchy that suppresses the junior's voice — the nurse who sees the wrong drug drawn but does not speak, the registrar who disagrees with the consultant but defers, the paramedic who knows the mechanism was different but is over-ridden. The authority gradient is steep by default, and it is the single most dangerous human factor in the trauma team, because the critical observation is held by the most junior person and the decision is made by the most senior. The TeamSTEPPS framework teaches the structured techniques that flatten the gradient and surface the concern:[5]
Inquiry
- The structured seeking of the information and the views of others
- "What do you think is going on?" — the leader who asks the junior
- Invites the dissenting view and the unspoken concern
- The team that is asked is the team that answers
Advocacy
- The structured statement of the concern, the information or the view
- "I am concerned about the bilateral chest findings" — the nurse who speaks up
- Advocates for the patient when the team is missing something
- Requires the psychological safety to speak — the leader must invite it
Assertion
- The structured escalation when the concern is not heard
- The two-challenge rule: the concern stated twice, then the chain of command
- CUS: "I am Concerned, I am Uncomfortable, this is a Safety issue"
- The last-resort tool that overrides the gradient to stop the error
Human factors — the fixation error and the cognitive traps
The human factors are the cognitive and the perceptual limitations that cause the error in the high-stakes, high-stress environment. The trauma resus is the prototypical environment of the cognitive overload, the time pressure, the noise, and the ambiguity, and the human factors are the predictable failure modes. The Fellowship candidate must know the three classic cognitive traps and the structured counter-measures:[6][11]
Fixation error
- The anchoring on a single diagnosis despite the contradictory evidence
- The dramatic open fracture that distracts from the lethal intra-abdominal bleed
- The most dangerous cognitive trap in the multi-injured patient
- Counter-measure: the formal time-out, the aloud re-summary, the explicit invitation of the dissent
Cognitive overload
- The exceeding of the working-memory capacity in the high-acuity resus
- The leader who tries to hold ten variables in the head without the scribe
- Manifests as the omission, the duplication, the delayed decision
- Counter-measure: the scribe, the aloud summary at fixed intervals, the standing back from the procedure
Authority gradient
- The unspoken hierarchy that suppresses the junior voice
- The nurse who sees the wrong drug and does not speak
- The single most dangerous human factor in the team
- Counter-measure: the named roles, the inquiry, the two-challenge rule, the CUS
Task fixation
- The absorption in a single task to the exclusion of the global picture
- The leader who intubates and misses the falling blood pressure
- The loss of the situational awareness by the procedural engagement
- Counter-measure: the leader who does not touch the patient, the periodic aloud summary
The debrief
The debrief after the trauma resuscitation — whether the patient survived or not — is the mechanism by which the team learns from the event, the individual processes the emotional impact, and the system identifies the improvement points. The debrief is brief, structured, non-judgemental, and focused on the team performance and the system factors. It identifies what went well, what could have been done differently, and what system change is needed. Its omission is the omission of the learning opportunity.[1]
The debrief is the structured conversation that follows the resuscitation, and it serves three distinct purposes that must not be conflated: the clinical review (what happened, what was done, what was missed, what could be done differently), the system review (what equipment failed, what protocol was absent, what staffing was inadequate), and the emotional processing (how the team felt, who is at risk of the secondary traumatic stress, who needs the follow-up). The well-run debrief addresses all three, in that order, and is led by the team leader in a private space, away from the resus bay, within minutes of the completion.[8]
The structured debrief — the Plus-Delta framework
1. The engagement
The leader convenes the team, names the purpose ("we are going to debrief for five minutes, this is a learning conversation, not a blame conversation"), and establishes the confidentiality and the psychological safety. The team that feels judged does not speak honestly.
2. The reaction
Each member is invited to name the feeling in one word — "shaken", "satisfied", "frustrated", "numb". The reaction phase normalises the emotional impact and identifies the member who may need the individual follow-up. The leader does not skip this phase — the emotional processing is the precondition for the clinical learning.
3. The description
The leader or the scribe reconstructs the timeline from the scribe record — the arrival, the primary survey, the key interventions, the disposition, the outcome. The shared reconstruction surfaces the discrepancies in the recollection and aligns the team on what actually happened.
4. The analysis — Plus and Delta
The team identifies the Plus (what went well, to be reinforced) and the Delta (what would be done differently next time, the Greek delta signifying the change). The Plus-Delta is non-judgemental and specific — not "the leadership was good" but "the aloud summary at the five-minute mark re-oriented the team". The Delta is the actionable change.
5. The system take-home
The single system change that the team will escalate — the missing chest-drain tray, the delayed blood-bank response, the absent anaesthetic cover. The system change is documented and assigned to a named owner for the follow-up at the morbidity-and-mortality meeting.
6. The summary
The leader closes the debrief with the acknowledgement of the team effort, the named actions, and the offer of the individual follow-up for any member who needs it. The debrief is brief — under fifteen minutes — and is not postponed, because the deferred debrief is the debrief that never happens.
Fanning and Gaba (Simulation in Healthcare 2007) — the role of debriefing in simulation-based learning
The major trauma network — the system that surrounds the team
The trauma team does not operate in isolation — it operates within the major trauma network, the regional system that triages the severely injured patient to the right hospital, coordinates the retrieval, and audits the outcome. The network is the population-level expression of the principle that the trauma outcome depends on the time to the definitive care, and the severely injured patient who is taken to the nearest hospital that lacks the trauma capability is the patient who is taken to the wrong place. The network routes the patient past the lower-acuity hospital to the major trauma centre, and it audits the system performance through the trauma registry.[9][10]
Major Trauma Centre
- The definitive trauma capability — the 24/7 trauma team, the operating theatre, the interventional radiology, the neurosurgery, the cardiothoracic
- The destination for the severely injured (ISS above 12, the physiological or the anatomical activation criteria)
- The hospital that receives the bypass — the patient is routed past the closer lower-acuity hospital
- Audited by the trauma registry — the outcome benchmark for the network
Trauma Unit
- The trauma capability for the moderate injury — the resuscitation, the stabilisation, the definitive care for the non-complex injury
- Receives the trauma that does not meet the major-trauma-centre criteria
- Stabilises and transfers the major trauma that arrives unexpectedly — the bypass that failed
- Coordinates with the major trauma centre on the transfer and the retrieval
Local Emergency Hospital
- The closest hospital, often without the dedicated trauma capability
- Receives the walk-in trauma and the minor injury
- Stabilises and transfers the major trauma that presents unexpectedly
- The default destination when the network is not activated — the site of the under-triage
Retrieval service
- The road and the air ambulance, the retrieval physician, the critical-care transfer team
- Provides the pre-hospital care, the scene triage, and the inter-hospital transfer
- Activates the major trauma network from the scene — the pre-hospital triage that routes to the major trauma centre
- Coordinates the time-critical transfer of the stabilised patient to the definitive care
Common pitfalls
The recurring errors are: a team leader who performs procedures and loses the overview; the failure to take the paramedic MIST handover before moving the patient; the roles not allocated at the pre-arrival briefing; sending the unstable patient to the CT instead of the theatre; the fixation on the dramatic injury and the missing of the lethal one; the failure to call for the specialty help early; the omission of the debrief; the steep authority gradient that suppresses the junior's voice; the absence of the closed-loop communication on the drug doses; the leader who does not deliver the aloud summary at the fixed intervals; the absence of the scribe; and the trauma that is taken to the closest hospital rather than the major trauma centre.[12]
Exam practice
SAQ — The trauma team activation, the MIST handover and the role allocation
10 minutes · 10 marks
You are the trauma team leader on duty. The pre-hospital notification arrives: a 25-year-old cyclist struck by a truck at 60 km/h, thrown 5 metres, unconscious at the scene, GCS 8 on the paramedic arrival, intubated at the scene, BP 90 systolic, with the obvious deformity of the right leg and the abdominal bruising. The estimated time of arrival is 8 minutes. The trauma team assembles and you have the team of the airway doctor, the procedure doctor, the nurse, the scribe, and the radiographer.
SAQ — The fixation error and the authority gradient in the trauma resus
10 minutes · 10 marks
You are the trauma team leader in a case of a 45-year-old man with the stab wound to the left chest. The FAST is positive in the pericardial window and the patient is becoming progressively more hypotensive. The procedure doctor has just placed the chest drain and is keen to focus on the haemothorax. The junior doctor says 'should we consider the tamponade, the pericardial FAST is positive?' but is talked over by the senior registrar who insists the chest drain output is the priority.
Red flags
The following features identify the trauma team at risk of a leadership or a CRM failure, in which the structured principles are applied:[4]
[12]Fellowship viva scenarios — the leadership and the CRM in practice
The Fellowship examiner tests the team leadership not as the abstract knowledge but as the demonstrated practice — the structured response to the scenario that demands the leadership decision. The following scenarios are the prototypical viva structures, and the candidate's answer must demonstrate the structured framework, the named principles, and the named tools.[5]
Scenario 1 — the team leader who is pulled into the procedure
The patient is a twenty-five-year-old man, post a high-speed motorcycle collision, intubated and ventilated, the blood pressure falling from 95 to 70 over the five minutes since the arrival. The team leader, an emergency physician, is at the head of the bed attempting a difficult second intravenous access because the airway doctor is occupied with the ventilator. The registrar asks, "should we activate the massive transfusion protocol?" The leader, focused on the cannula, does not hear.[12]
The structured answer identifies the authority gradient and the task fixation as the human factors: the leader has abandoned the global view for the local task, and the registrar's question is the unaddressed concern that the gradient suppresses. The correct leadership action is the leader stepping back from the procedure, allocating the access to the circulation doctor, delivering the aloud summary, activating the massive transfusion protocol, and inviting the dissent. The scenario tests the candidate's recognition of the CRM failure and the structured correction.[1]
Scenario 2 — the fixation on the dramatic injury
The patient is a forty-year-old woman, post a fall from a horse, with the dramatic open tibial fracture that the team is splinting and analgasing. The blood pressure is 100, the heart rate is 110, the abdomen is distended and tender. The registrar is focused on the limb. The nurse, who has been in the trauma team for ten years, says quietly to the registrar, "I am worried about the abdomen."[12]
The structured answer identifies the fixation error (the dramatic limb injury hiding the lethal intra-abdominal bleed) and the advocacy and assertion (the nurse's voiced concern). The correct leadership action is the team leader's formal time-out, the aloud re-summary of the findings (the open fracture, the distended tender abdomen, the falling blood pressure), the FAST scan, the activation of the massive transfusion protocol and the surgical referral, and the explicit acknowledgement of the nurse's concern. The scenario tests the candidate's recognition of the fixation and the structured use of the advocacy.[12]
Scenario 3 — the disposition decision
The patient is a fifty-year-old man, post a stab wound to the left chest, intubated for the deteriorating GCS, the blood pressure 80 on the first unit of blood, the FAST positive in the pericardial view. The CT scanner is available; the operating theatre is on the same floor.[7]
The structured answer identifies the physiology decision: the patient is unstable (the blood pressure, the positive pericardial FAST, the transfusion requirement) and goes to the operating theatre, not the CT scanner. The leader announces the decision, the rationale (the haemodynamic instability and the tamponade physiology), and the plan (the emergency department thoracotomy if the patient arrests en route, the cardiothoracic and the general surgical teams to meet in the theatre). The scenario tests the candidate's recognition that the disposition is the physiology decision and the structured communication of the plan.[7]
Scenario 4 — the debrief after the death
The patient is a sixteen-year-old boy, post a single-vehicle collision, who arrested on arrival and died despite the full trauma team resuscitation. The team is shaken; the registrar who led the resuscitation is in the corridor, silent; the nurse who knew the patient's family is in tears.[12]
The structured answer identifies the three purposes of the debrief (the clinical, the system, the emotional) and the Plus-Delta framework. The correct leadership action is the convocation of the team within the hour, the engagement (the named purpose, the psychological safety, the confidentiality), the reaction (each member names the feeling), the description (the timeline reconstruction), the analysis (the Plus and the Delta), and the summary (the acknowledgement, the named actions, the offer of the individual follow-up, the employee-assistance referral for the nurse and the registrar). The scenario tests the candidate's recognition that the debrief after the death is never optional and that the emotional processing is the safeguard against the moral injury.[2]
Summary — the leadership is the system and the system is the leadership
The trauma team leadership is the discipline that converts the chaos of the multi-injured patient into the structured, parallel, closed-loop, debriefed resuscitation that survives the cognitive overload. The Fellowship candidate must master the four layers: the system layer (the activation criteria, the major trauma network, the trauma registry), the team layer (the named ATLS roles, the pre-arrival briefing, the MIST handover), the leadership layer (the standing back, the aloud summary, the disposition decision, the specialty referral), and the CRM layer (the closed-loop communication, the inquiry–advocacy–assertion, the fixation error, the authority gradient, the debrief). The four layers are inseparable — the system that does not activate, the team that is not briefed, the leader who performs the procedure, and the CRM that suppresses the dissent are the four faces of the same mortality, and the structured principles address all four.[1][3][5][9]
References
- [1]Greif R, Bhanji F, Bigham BL, et al. Education, Implementation, and Teams: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (ILCOR CoSTR). Resuscitation, 2020.PMID 33098918
- [2]Farquharson B, Caesar D, McKee S, et al. Teaching team competencies within resuscitation training: a systematic review. Resuscitation Plus, 2024.PMID 39006135
- [3]Galvagno SM Jr, Nahmias JT, Young DA Advanced Trauma Life Support(®) Update 2019: Management and Applications for Adults and Special Populations. Anesthesiology clinics, 2019.PMID 30711226
- [4]Tiel Groenestege-Kreb D, van Maarseveen O, Leenen L Trauma team. British journal of anaesthesia, 2014.PMID 24980423
- [5]Henriksen K, Battles JB, Keyes MA, et al. TeamSTEPPS(™): Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety. 2008.PMID 21249942
- [6]Pai DR, Kumar VH, Sobana R Perioperative crisis resource management simulation training in anaesthesia. Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2024.PMID 38406342
- [7]Alexandrino H, Martinho B, Ferreira L, et al. Non-technical skills and teamwork in trauma: from the emergency department to the operating room. Frontiers in medicine, 2023.PMID 38116034
- [8]Fanning RM, Gaba DM The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 2007.PMID 19088616
- [9]Tiel Groenestege-Kreb D, van Maarseveen O, Leenen L Trauma team. British journal of anaesthesia, 2014.PMID 24980423
- [10]Haslam NR, Bouamra O, Lawrence T, et al. Time to definitive care within major trauma networks in England. BJS open, 2020.PMID 32644299
- [11]Braithwaite J, Wears RL, Hollnagel E Resilient health care: turning patient safety on its head. International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2015.PMID 26294709
- [12]Chien DS, Yiang GT, Liu CY, et al. Association of In-Hospital Mortality and Trauma Team Activation: A 10-Year Study. Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022.PMID 36292022