Development, Feasibility, and Knowledge Impact of a Massive Open Online Course on Radiation Safety: A Multicentre Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports the development of an innovative, interactive Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) teaching radiation safety principles in the vascular workplace, using stepwise e-learning with multiple choice question tests (MCQs), educational videos, and a serious game. The aim was to study the MOOC impact on radiation safety knowledge and assess its feasibility and acceptability. METHODS: An international multicentre prospective study included team members active in the hybrid operating room. The MOOC was offered voluntarily via a secure online learning platform. A standardised MCQ test (15 questions) assessed radiation safety knowledge pre- and post-course (range 0 - 100%). Acceptability and feasibility were tested via the previously validated, Evaluating e-learning system success (EESS) model, using five point Likert scales. RESULTS: In eight centres across four countries, 150 of 203 invited endovascular team members consented. Over a seven week study period, surgeons (28%, including vascular surgery trainees and consultants), nurses (27%, including scrub, circulating and anaesthetic nurses), anaesthetists (43%, including trainees and consultants), and radiographers (3%) participated. Of those, 67% completed the course. The average radiation knowledge improved by 22.8% (95% CI 19.5 - 26.0%; p < .001) after MOOC completion, from 48% to 71% (standard deviation [SD] 14 and 15% respectively), requiring a mean time investment of 169 minutes (SD 89 minutes). In centres with a radiographer, mean knowledge gain after MOOC completion was significantly smaller (14%, SD 19% vs. 24%, SD 16%, p = .036). The course was deemed feasible and acceptable according to the EESS model with a total mean score of 3.68/5. CONCLUSION: This newly developed, multimodal MOOC was deemed feasible and effective across multiple international centres. The MOOC significantly contributes to radiation safety education of the entire endovascular team, improving radiation safety knowledge. The course may optimise workplace radiation safety behaviour and therefore enhance team and patient safety.

Assessing endovascular team performances in a hybrid room using the Black Box system: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The hybrid room (HR) is a complex, high-risk environment, requiring teams (surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, technologists) to master various skills, including the 'As Low As Reasonably Achievable' principle of radiation safety. This prospective single center cohort reports the first use of the Operating Room Black Box (ORBB) in a HR. This medical data recording system captures procedural and audio-visual data to facilitate structured team performance analysis. METHODS: Patients planned for endovascular repair of an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) or treatment of symptomatic iliac-femoral-popliteal atherosclerotic disease (Peripheral Vascular Interventions or PVI) were included. Validated measures and established assessment tools were used to assess (non-)technical skills, radiation safety performance and environmental distractions. RESULTS: Six EVAR and sixteen PVI procedures were captured. Technical performance for one EVAR was rated 19/35 on the procedure-specific scale, below the 'acceptable' score of 21. Technical skills were rated above acceptable in all PVI procedures. Shared decision making and leadership were rated highly in 12/22 cases, whereas surgical communication and nurses' task management were rated low in 14/22 cases. Team members rarely stepped back from the C-arm during digital subtraction angiography. Radiation safety behavior was scored below 'acceptable' in 14/22 cases. A median (interquartile range) number of 12 (6-23) auditory distractions was observed per procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The ORBB facilitates holistic workplace-based assessment of endovascular performance in a HR by combining objective assessment parameters and rating scale-based evaluations. Strengths and weaknesses were identified in team members' (non-)technical and radiation safety practices. This technology has the potential to improve vascular surgical practice, though human input remains crucial. (NCT04854278).

Surgeons' Leadership Style and Team Behavior in the Hybrid Operating Room: Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the relationship between surgeons' leadership style and team behavior in the hybrid operating room through video coding. Secondly, possible fluctuations possible fluctuations in leadership styles and team behavior during operative phases were studied. BACKGROUND: Leadership is recognized as a key component to successful team functioning in high-risk industries. The 'full range of leadership' theory is commonly used to evaluate leadership, marking transformational, transactional, and passive. Few studies have examined the effects of these leadership styles on team behavior in surgery and/or their fluctuations during surgery. METHODS: A single-center study included patients planned for routine endovascular procedures. A medical data capture system was used to allow post hoc video coding through Behavior Anchored Rating Scales. Multilevel statistical analysis was performed to assess possible correlations between leadership style and 3 team behavior indicators (speaking up, knowledge sharing, and collaboration) on an operative phase level. RESULTS: Twenty-two cases were analyzed (47 hours recording). Transformational leadership is positively related to the extent to which team members work together (γ=0.20, P <0.001), share knowledge (γ=0.45, P <0.001), and speak up (γ=0.64, P <0.001). Passive leadership is significantly positively correlated with speaking up (γ=0.29, P =0.004). Leadership style and team behavior clearly fluctuate during a procedure, with similar patterns across different types of endovascular procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with other professional fields, surgeons' transformational leadership enhances team behavior, especially during the most complex operative phases. This suggests that encouraging surgeons to learn and actively implement a transformational leadership style is meaningful to enhance patient safety and team performance.

Radiation Safety Performance is More than Simply Measuring Doses! Development of a Radiation Safety Rating Scale.

PURPOSE: Radiation safety performance is often evaluated using dose parameters measured by personal dosimeters and/or the C-arm, which provide limited information about teams' actual radiation safety behaviors. This study aimed to develop a rating scale to evaluate team radiation safety behaviors more accurately and investigate its reliability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus was organized involving European vascular surgeons (VS), interventional radiologists, and interventional cardiologists. Initial items and anchors were drafted a priori and rated using five-point Likert scales. Participants could suggest additional items or adjustments. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% agreement (rating ≥ 4) with Cronbach's alpha ≥ .80. Two VS with expertise in radiation safety evaluated 15 video-recorded endovascular repairs of infrarenal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) to assess usability, inter and intrarater reliability. RESULTS: Thirty-one of 46 invited specialists completed three rating rounds to generate the final rating scale. Five items underwent major adjustments. In the final round, consensus was achieved for all items (alpha = .804; agreement > 87%): 'Pre-procedural planning', 'Preparation in angiosuite/operating room', 'Shielding equipment', 'Personal protective equipment', 'Position of operator/team', 'Radiation usage awareness', 'C-arm handling', 'Adjusting image quality', 'Additional dose reducing functions', 'Communication/leadership', and 'Overall radiation performance and ALARA principle'. All EVARs were rated, yielding excellent Cronbach's alpha (.877) with acceptable interrater and excellent intrarater reliability (ICC = .782; ICC = .963, respectively). CONCLUSION: A reliable framework was developed to assess radiation safety behaviors in endovascular practice and provide teams with formative feedback. The final scale is provided in this publication.

Introduction of a surgical Black Box system in a hybrid angiosuite: Challenges and opportunities.

PURPOSE: In laparoscopy, the Operating Room Black Box® (ORBB) provides insights into operative performance to improve patient safety. This technology may also enhance endovascular surgical practice; however, the use of a C-arm and X-rays pose important challenges, hindering transferability to an endovascular context. We describe the first implementation of ORBB technology in a hybrid angiosuite and illustrate its value in evaluating surgeons' radiation safety, technical and non-technical performance. METHODS: Team members (surgeons, nurses, anaesthesiologists) and stakeholders were informed during several information sessions. Together with teams from Surgical Safety Technologies (Toronto, Canada), an implementation plan was developed, and video-evaluation frameworks were chosen. Radiation safety was assessed using dose measurements and video-evaluation of safety-related behaviours. Technical performance was assessed using 'global' (GRS) and 'procedure-specific' (PRS) rating scales and the 'EndoVascular Aortic Repair Assessment of Technical Expertise' (EVARATE) framework. Surgeons' non-technical skills were assessed with the NOTSS framework. RESULTS: The system captures Audio-visual data from four ceiling-mounted cameras, three ceiling-array microphones, the fluoroscopy screen and anaesthesia monitor. After patient and team consent, an elective endovascular aneurysm repair was successfully analysed. Dose-Area-Product and Air Kerma were 71094 mGy.cm2 and 270 mGy, respectively. Behavioural analysis revealed deficiencies in stepping back and radiation safety communication. Technical skill assessment was feasible: GRS: 29/40; 'PRS': 27/35; EVARATE: 29/35. Non-technical analysis highlighted surgeons' leadership qualities. CONCLUSION: An innovative data capture platform has been successfully installed to evaluate overall performance during endovascular procedures. This technology may facilitate identification of (radiation) safety-related errors and instigate educational interventions based on real-world issues.

Team perception of the radiation safety climate in the hybrid angiography suite: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Good radiation safety practice in the angiosuite is essential to protect patients and healthcare workers. Most strategies aim to advance radiation safety through technological upgrades and educational initiatives. However, safety literature suggests that additional ways to improve radiation safety in the angiosuite do exist. The safety climate reflects the way team members perceive various key characteristics of their work environment and is closely related to relevant safety outcomes. A specific 'radiation safety climate' has not been described nor studied in the hybrid angiosuite. This study explores the radiation safety climate in the hybrid angiosuite and its relation to team members' radiation safety behavior, knowledge and motivation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Vascular surgeons, fellows/trainees and operating room nurses active in the angiosuite at five hospitals were invited to complete an online self-report questionnaire assessing the radiation safety climate (28 items); radiation safety behavior; radiation safety knowledge and radiation safety motivation. Relations between climate scores and behavior were investigated using Pearson correlations. Mediation was analyzed using the Baron and Kenny analysis. P-Values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: No major differences were identified in total radiation safety climate scores between centers or team member functions. Scale reliability for radiation safety climate was good to excellent (α > 0.663). Total radiation safety climate scores were positively related to the radiation safety behavior score (r = 0.403; p = 0.015). This relation was partially mediated by radiation safety knowledge (ß = 0.1730; 95% CI: [0.0475; 0.3512]), while radiation safety motivation did not act as a mediator: (ß = 0.010; 95% CI: [-0.0561; 0.0998]). CONCLUSION: A well-developed radiation safety climate in the hybrid angiosuite fosters positive radiation safety behaviors, which may partially be explained through improved radiation safety knowledge transfer. Further research on (radiation) safety climate and its impact on radiation safety-related outcome measures for patients is recommended.

Non-technical attributes and surgical experience: A cross-sectional study comparing communication styles and attitudes in surgical staff, trainees and applicants.

BACKGROUND: This monocentric study aimed to explore whether key non-technical attributes can be reliably measured in a mixed population of candidates applying for surgical training, surgical trainees and staff and to identify any differences between these groups. MATERIALS & METHODS: Candidates applying for surgical training, surgical trainees and staff from four surgical specialties (general surgery, orthopedics, plastic surgery or urology) at a tertiary academic teaching hospital were all sent an online self-report questionnaire. The Communication Styles Inventory (CSI, 96 items) was used to assess a six-dimensional behavioral model of participant communication styles (expressiveness, preciseness, verbal aggressiveness, questioningness, emotionality and impression manipulativeness). Attitudes toward uncertainty and risks were assessed with the Physicians' Reaction toward Uncertainty (PRU, 15 items) and Physician Risk Attitudes (PRA, 6 items) scales respectively. Data was encoded and analyzed using parametric testing. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 177 participants (110 candidates; 42 trainees; 25 staff). All scales had very good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >0.80). After controlling for gender-based differences, surgical candidates scored significantly higher on 'expressiveness' (P = 0.012) and were significantly less risk-averse (P = 0.006) than trainees and staff. Surgical trainees scored lowest on the CSI 'questioningness' subscale (P = 0.019) and had significantly more difficulties dealing with uncertainty, characterized by their highest scores on the 'concern about bad outcome' (P = 0.021) and reluctance to disclose uncertainty to patients' (P = 0.05) subscales. Multiple subscales revealed gender-based differences in candidate and trainee groups, which were not noted for surgical staff. CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful differences in non-technical attributes of surgical staff, trainees and candidates have been identified, which may be explained by differences in clinical experience and learning and may suggest that these develop over time. Further research on assessment of non-technical attributes during surgical selections and the role of both technical and non-technical attributes in surgery at large is needed.

Recurrent changes in the work environment, job resources and distress among nurses: a comparative cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Occupational stress in nursing has frequently been considered in nursing literature. The operationalization of job demands in different work settings and its relation to distress have been discussed to identify significant interactions with job resources. In this study, job demands were defined as recurrent changes in the work environment of nurses (i.e. changing colleagues, supervisors, workplaces, working hours and tasks). In particular, we focused on the 'negative appraisal' (i.e. 'threat') of these changes. The interaction between 'threat' and job resources (i.e. timing control, method control and supervisor support) and its relation to distress among Registered Nurses was examined. METHODS: The study was part of a larger cross-sectional survey among 7863 (response rate 51%) employees belonging to 10 general hospitals in Belgium. The results are based on self-administered questionnaires of 1094 Registered Nurses employed in intensive care units (ICU) (n = 416) and surgery/medical wards (non-ICU) (n = 678). General Linear Modelling was used to test the moderating effects. RESULTS: In both study samples, 'threat' was positively associated with distress (P < 0.001). However, in contrast with non-ICU nurses, ICU nurses only considered 'supervisor support' as a significant moderator in the positive relationship between 'threat' and distress (P = 0.023). 'Timing and method control', instead of supervisor support, moderated this relation among non-ICU nurses (P = < 0.001 and 0.018, respectively). CONCLUSION: These findings provide additional evidence to consider negative appraisal of recurrent changes as occupational specific stressor in nursing. Moreover, the buffering effects which were found between 'threat' and the measured job resources in relation to distress, and the difference of these interactions in ICU and non-ICU health care settings, confirmed the suggestion to consider particular job characteristics in job stress research. Finally, the findings of our study may be of importance for nursing administrators who are dealing with distress among nurses.