OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to measure the effect of a coleadership model on team performance compared with singular leadership model in simulated maternity emergencies.METHODS:A randomized, counterbalanced, crossover trial was performed at 2 tertiary maternity hospitals. Teams of obstetric physicians and nurse/midwives responded to 2 simulated maternity emergencies in either a singular or coleadership model. The primary outcome measure was teamwork rated with the Auckland Team Behavior tool. Secondary outcome measures included clinical performance (completion of critical tasks, time to critical intervention, documentation), self-rated teamwork (TEAM tool) and workload. Participants also answered a survey assessing their views on the coleadership model. Paired t tests and mixed-effects linear regression considering team as a random effect were used to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted associations between leadership model and the outcomes of interest.RESULTS:There was no difference between leadership models for the primary outcome of teamwork (5.3 vs. 5.3, P = 0.91). Clinical outcome measures and self-rated teamwork scores were also similar. Team leaders reported higher workload than other team members, but these were not different between the leadership models. Participants viewed coleadership positively despite no measured objective evidence of benefit.CONCLUSIONS:A coleadership model did not lead to a difference in team performance within simulated maternity emergencies. Despite this, participants viewed coleadership positively.

Shared leadership improves team performance in many domains and is present in some interprofessional healthcare teams. Despite the dominant paradigm of a singular obstetrician leader in maternity emergencies, co-leadership, a specific form of shared leadership, has been identified as a potentially beneficial to clinical care. This qualitative interview study addresses the gaps in knowledge regarding clinician attitudes toward co-leadership and how a co-leadership structure might be implemented within a maternity care setting. Twenty-five clinicians (midwives, obstetricians and anaesthetists) working in the birthing units of two tertiary maternity units were interviewed and a conventional content analysis conducted. Clinicians viewed co-leadership as potentially beneficial to patient care through improved leadership performance and co-leader back up behavior. Implementation of co-leadership was thought to require a supportive organizational culture, agreed patient management protocols and the participation in simulation training. Enacting co-leadership required adaptable leadership sharing practices, effective communication, and high levels of trust between the co-leaders. These findings inform the future implementation strategies for co-leadership in interprofessional healthcare teams.

Background Shared leadership is associated with improved team performance in many domains, but little is understood about how leadership is shared spontaneously in maternity emergency teams, and if it is associated with improved team performance. Methods A video analysis study of multidisciplinary teams attending a maternity emergency management course was performed at a simulation centre colocated with a tertiary maternity hospital. Sixteen teams responding to a simulated postpartum haemorrhage were analysed between November 2016 and November 2017. Videos were transcribed, and utterances coded for leadership type using a coding system developed a priori. Distribution of leadership utterances between team members was calculated using the Gini coefficient. Teamwork was assessed using validated tools and clinical performance was assessed by time to perform a critical intervention and a checklist of required tasks. Results There was a significant sharing of leadership functions across the team despite the traditional recommendation for a singular leader, with the dominant leader only accounting for 58% of leadership utterances. There was no significant difference in Auckland Team Assessment Tool scores between high and low leadership sharing teams (5.02 vs 4.96, p=0.574). Time to critical intervention was shorter in low leadership sharing teams (193 s vs 312 s, p=0.018) but checklist completion did not differ significantly. Teams with better clinical performance had fewer leadership utterances beyond the dominant two leaders compared with poorer performing teams. Conclusions Leadership is spontaneously shared in maternity emergency teams despite the recommendation for singular leadership. Spontaneous leadership emerging from multiple team members does not appear to be associated with the improvements in team performance seen in other domains.

Maternity emergencies require effective leadership due to their time-critical high stakes nature, and like many emergency teams are recommended to have a singular leader. Midwives possess many of the skills required for leadership, but the extent to which they contribute to leadership in emergencies is unknown. In this video analysis study of 16 interprofessional teams responding to a simulated post-partum hemorrhage, a functional view of leadership was applied to determine midwifery contribution to leadership. The number and type of leadership utterances by team members during an emergency response was assessed, and midwifery and doctor leadership utterances compared. Midwives contributed just over 40% of all leadership utterances, indicating the occurrence of interprofessional shared leadership, despite the recommendation for a singular leadership. While the number of leadership utterances per scenario was similar for midwives and doctors, midwives contributed less to utterances of a clinical nature compared to doctors but a similar amount of non-clinical leadership. Further exploration of the factors which influence midwifery leadership in emergencies and the impact it may have on patient care is warranted.

Objectives The aims of this review were to consolidate the reported literature describing shared leadership in healthcare action teams (HCATs) and to review the reported outcomes related to leadership sharing in healthcare emergencies. Methods A systematic search of the English language literature before November 2017 was performed using PsycINFO, MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE. Articles describing sharing of leadership functions in HCATs were included. Healthcare teams performing routine work were excluded. Studies were reviewed for type of leadership sharing and sharing-related outcomes. Results Thirty-three articles met the inclusion criteria. A variety of shared leadership models were described across the following three categories: spontaneous collaboration, intuitive working relations, and institutionalized practices. While leadership sharing has the potential for both positive and negative influences on team performance, only six articles reported outcomes potentially attributable to shared leadership. Conclusions Despite strong evidence for a positive relationship between shared leadership and team performance in other domains, there is limited literature describing shared leadership models in HCATs. The association between shared leadership and team performance in HCATs is a rich area for further investigation.

Art HistoryVolume 14, Issue 4 p. 459-487 Article DAVID'S MARTYR-PORTRAIT OF LE PELETIER DE SAINT-FARGEAU AND THE CONUNDRUMS OF REVOLUTIONARY REPRESENTATION Robert Simon, Robert Simon Harvard UniversitySearch for more papers by this author Robert Simon, Robert Simon Harvard UniversitySearch for more papers by this author First published: December 1991 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8365.1991.tb00454.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume14, Issue4December 1991Pages 459-487 RelatedInformation