Does teamwork improve performance in the operating room? A multilevel evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Medical care is a team effort, especially as patient cases are more complex. Communication, cooperation, and coordination are vital to effective care, especially in complex service lines such as the operating room (OR). Team training, specifically the TeamSTEPPS training program, has been touted as one methodology for optimizing teamwork among providers and increasing patient safety. Although such team-training programs have transformed the culture and outcomes of other dynamic, high-risk industries such as aviation and nuclear power, evidence of team training effectiveness in health care is still evolving. Although providers tend to react positively to many training programs, evidence that training contributes to important behavioral and patient safety outcomes is lacking. METHOD: A multilevel evaluation of the TeamSTEPPS training program was conducted within the OR service line with a control location. The evaluation was a mixed-model design with one between-groups factor (TeamSTEPPS training versus no training) and two within-groups factors (time period, team). The groups were located at separate campuses to minimize treatment diffusion. Trainee reactions, learning, behaviors in the OR, and proxy outcome measures such as the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) and Operating Room Management Attitudes Questionnaire (ORMAQ) were collected. RESULTS: All levels of evaluation demonstrated positive results. The trained group demonstrated significant increases in the quantity and quality of presurgical procedure briefings and the use of quality teamwork behaviors during cases. Increases were also found in perceptions of patient safety culture and teamwork attitudes. DISCUSSION: The hospital system has integrated elements of TeamSTEPPS into orientation training provided to all incoming hospital employees, including nonclinical staff.

Understanding the barriers to physician error reporting and disclosure: a systemic approach to a systemic problem.

INTRODUCTION: The issues of medical errors and medical malpractice have stimulated significant interest in establishing transparency in health care, in other words, ensuring that medical professionals formally report medical errors and disclose related outcomes to patients and families. However, research has amply shown that transparency is not a universal practice among physicians. METHODS: A review of the literature was carried out using the search terms "transparency," "patient safety," "disclosure," "medical error," "error reporting," "medical malpractice," "doctor-patient relationship," and "physician" to find articles describing physician barriers to transparency. RESULTS: The current literature underscores that a complex Web of factors influence physician reluctance to engage in transparency. Specifically, 4 domains of barriers emerged from this analysis: intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and societal. CONCLUSION: Transparency initiatives will require vigorous, interdisciplinary efforts to address the systemic and pervasive nature of the problem. Several ethical and social-psychological barriers suggest that medical schools and hospitals should collaborate to establish continuity in education and ensure that knowledge acquired in early education is transferred into long-term learning. At the institutional level, practical and cultural barriers suggest the creation of supportive learning environments and private discussion forums where physicians can seek moral support in the aftermath of an error. To overcome resistance to culture transformation, incremental change should be considered, for example, replacing arcane transparency policies and complex reporting mechanisms with clear, user-friendly guidelines.