Table 8.

Mean (95% CI) of video assessment performance scores with the TEAM scale

	ISS	OSS
	Mean	Mean	p Value*
Video assessment scoring of performance
TEAM (means of item rating) Simulation in emergency CS*	2.6 (2.3 to 3.0)	2.4 (2.1 to 2.8)
TEAM (means of item rating) Simulation in PPH*	2.9 (2.5 to 3.2)	2.8 (2.5 to 3.2)
Estimated overall difference in mean between ISS and OSS†	0.1 (−0.2 to 0.5)		0.36
TEAM (global rating) Simulation in emergency CS*	6.1 (4.8 to 7.3)	5.3 (4.0 to 6.5)
TEAM (global rating) Simulation in PPH*	6.8 (5.5 to 8.1)	6.3 (5.0 to 7.6)
Estimated overall difference in mean between ISS and OSS†	0.7 (−0.4 to 1.7)		0.18
Differences in video assessment scores of performance between emergency CS (1st) and PPH (2nd) simulation scenarios
Differences in mean of TEAM (means of item rating) of the simulation in emergency CS versus PPH†	0.3 (0.1 to 0.5)		0.0003
Differences in mean of TEAM (global rating) of the simulation in emergency CS versus PPH†	0.9 (0.3 to1.5)		0.005

Four consultants recruited outside the research hospital did the video assessment scoring. Analysis comprised a comparison of the mean TEAM score of the ISS versus the OSS group.

*Means found from a linear mixed model including an interaction between the simulation group (ISS and OSS) and simulation scenario (emergency CS and PPH).

†Overall difference in means found from an additive linear mixed model based on the simulation group and simulation scenario.

CS, caesarean section; ISS, in situ simulation; OSS, off-site simulation; PPH, postpartum haemorrhage; Q, quartile; TEAM, Team Emergency Assessment Measure (range for item rating: 0–4; range for global rating:1–10).