Factors influencing teamwork and collaboration within a tertiary medical center

Table 1 Variables, questions, and constructs for the analysis

Construct	Question or statement1
Communication effectiveness (CE)
	It is easy for personnel here to ask questions when there is something that they do not understand
	I know the proper channels to direct questions regarding problems encountered at work
	I receive appropriate feedback about my performance
	My suggestions about safety issues would be acted upon if I expressed them to management
Teamwork (TW)
	Staff input is well received in the work area
	If it is difficult to speak up if I perceive a problem in the work setting
	Disagreements in the work setting are resolved appropriately
	I have the support I need from other personnel
	The professional staff here work together as a well-coordinated team
Safety culture (SC)
	I would feel safe being taken care of in my work area
	Errors or mistakes are handled appropriately in the work area
	It is very difficult to discuss errors or mistakes at work
	I am encouraged by my colleagues to report any concerns I may have
	The culture here makes it easy to learn from the errors of others
Job satisfaction (JS)
	I like my job
	Working here is like being part of a large family
	This is a good place to work
	I am proud to work in this place
	Morale here is very high
Work pressure (WP)
	When my workload becomes excessive, my performance is impaired
	I am less effective at work when fatigued
	I am more likely to make errors in tense or hostile situations
	Fatigue impairs my performance during emergency situations
Collaboration (CO)
	I experience good collaboration with other nurses
	I experience good collaboration with physicians
	I experience good collaboration with other health professionals
Work climate (WC)
	Problem personnel are dealt with constructively by management
	This hospital does a good job of training new personnel
	All the necessary information for diagnostic and therapeutic decisions is routinely available to me
	Trainees in my discipline are adequately supervised

¹Likert scale was used for each question: Disagree strongly (1); disagree slightly (2); neutral (3); agree slightly (4); and agree strongly (5). Subscales were constructed by summing the relevant items under the respective constructs.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics for the study variables (n = 3467 employees)

	EC	SC	JS	PR	WC	TW	CO
Mean	3.38	3.69	3.76	3.76	3.55	3.76	3.69
Standard deviation	1	0.66	0.89	0.9	0.62	0.71	0.71

EC: Effective communication; SC: Safety culture; JS; Job satisfaction; PR: Work pressure; WC: Work climate; TW: Perceived teamwork; CO: Collaboration.

Table 3 Correlation matrix for the study variables

	EC	SC	JS	PR	WC	TW	CO2
EC	1.00
SC	0.331	1.00
JS	0.261	0.661	1.00
PR	-0.131	-0.041	-0.131	1.00
WC	0.471	0.681	0.611	-0.061	1.00
TW	0.371	0.721	0.611	-0.061	0.671	1.00
CO	0.311	0.581	0.521	-0.03	0.861	0.621	1.00

¹Statistically significant at 0.01 or less,

²Endogenous variable. EC: Effective communication; SC: Safety culture; JS; Job satisfaction; PR: Work pressure; WC: Work climate; TW: Perceived teamwork; CO: Collaboration.

Table 4 Regression statistics of the revised path analysis

Predictor variables	Standardized regression coefficients	Unstandardized regression coefficients	Standard errors	Critical values
SC→TW	0.42	0.45	0.02	25.461
JS→TW	0.15	0.12	0.01	9.391
WC→TW	0.29	0.33	0.02	18.471
EC→CO	-0.13	-0.09	0.01	-13.531
TW→CO	0.10	0.10	0.01	8.551
WC→CO	0.85	0.98	0.01	69.041

¹Statistically significant at 0.01 or less. Goodness of fit (GOF) statistics for the structural equation model: χ² = 69.44 with 3 degrees of freedom; CMIN/Γ = 23.15, P = 0.001; NFI index = 1.00; CFI index = 0.995; and root mean squares error = 0.08. EC: Effective communication; SC: Safety culture; JS; Job satisfaction; PR: Work pressure; WC: Work climate; TW: Perceived teamwork; CO: Collaboration.