Table 2.

Confirmatory factor analysis of GrT-TPQ

Factors	Team Structure	Leadership	Situation monitoring	Mutual support	Commu-nication
Items
1. The skills of staff overlap sufficiently so that work can be shared when necessary.	0.61
2. Staff is held accountable for their actions.	0.61
3. Staff within my unit share information that enables timely decision-making by the direct patient care team.	0.76
4. My unit makes efficient use of resources (e.g. staff, supplies, equipment and information).	0.74
5. Staff understands their roles and responsibilities.	0.84
6. My unit has clearly articulated goals.	0.77
7. My unit operates at a high level of efficiency.	0.78
8. My supervisor/manager considers staff input when making decisions about patient care.		0.81
9. My supervisor/manager provides opportunities to discuss the unit’s performance after an event.		0.86
10. My supervisor/manager takes time to meet with staff to develop a plan for patient care.		0.84
11. My supervisor/manager ensures that adequate resources (e.g. staff, supplies, equipment and information) are available.		0.84
12. My supervisor/manager resolves conflicts successfully.		0.86
13. My supervisor/manager models appropriate team behaviour.		0.89
14. My supervisor/manager ensures that staff is aware of any situations or changes that may affect patient care.		0.86
15. Staff effectively anticipates each other’s needs.			0.67
16. Staff monitors each other’s performance.			0.61
17. Staff exchanges relevant information as it becomes available.			0.78
18. Staff continuously scans the environment for important information.			0.82
19. Staff shares information regarding potential complications (e.g. patient changes, bed availability).			0.81
20. Staff meets to re-evaluate patient care goals when aspects of the situation have changed.			0.74
21. Staff corrects each other’s mistakes to ensure that procedures are followed properly.			0.80
22. Staff assists fellow staff during high workload.				0.82
23. Staff request assistance from fellow staff when they feel overwhelmed.				0.72
24. Staff cautions each other about potentially dangerous situations.				0.8
25. Feedback between staff is delivered in a way that promotes positive interactions and future change.				0.82
26. Staff advocates for patients even when their opinion conflicts with that of a senior member of the unit.				0.43
27. When staff has a concern about patient safety, they challenge others until they are sure the concern has been heard.				0.65
28. Staff resolves their conflicts, even when the conflicts have become personal.				0.62
29. Information regarding patient care is explained to patients and their families in lay terms.					0.61
30. Staff relay relevant information in a timely manner.					0.81
31. When communicating with patients, staff allow enough time for questions.					0.74
32. Staff uses common terminology when communicating with each other.					0.71
33. Staff verbally verifies information that they receive from one another.					0.77
34. Staff follows a standardized method of sharing information when handing off patients.					0.78
35. Staff seeks information from all available sources.					0.79
Goodness-of-fit
Chi-square (df)	1124.761 (550)
p-value	< 0.0001
RMSEA	0.06
90% CI for RMSEA	(0.055–0.065)
GFI	0.989
AGFI	0.986
NFI	0.987
CFI	0.994
TLI	0.994

Factor I, Team structure; Factor II, Leadership; Factor III, Situation monitoring; Factor IV, Mutual support; Factor V, Communication; RMSEA root mean square error of approximation; GFI goodness-of-fit index; AGFI adjusted goodness of-fit index; NFI normed fit index; CFI comparative fit index; TLI Tucker Lewis Index. Levels for an acceptable model fit: RMSEA≤0.08; GFI ≥ 0.90; AGFI≥0.90; NFI ≥ 0.90; CFI ≥ 0.90; TLI ≥ 0.90