Usage of a Web-Based Workplace and Symptom Self-Management Intervention Tool to Improve Work Ability for Breast Cancer Survivors.

This work aimed to evaluate the usage of a web-based intervention (WISE: Work ability Improvement through Symptom and Ergonomic strategies) developed to improve work ability for women recently diagnosed with breast cancer. Twenty-two women undergoing adjuvant treatment for breast cancer were provided access to WISE. This website includes content pages (e.g., information on ergonomics, symptom management, and other work-related resources) and worksheets (e.g., journals to track symptoms or goals). It could be personalized based on individual work activities and symptoms. Measures assessed at 3 months included usage of the website and perceived usefulness. Thirteen of the 22 participants (60%) accessed WISE; 11 personalized their information. Content and worksheet pages had 97 and 79 visits, respectively. Most frequently visited pages were "setting goals" (i.e., prioritize and track symptoms; 45 visits) and "steps to creating your WISE plan" (i.e., incorporate symptom and ergonomic strategies; 16 visits). Median duration time was 11.05 (range 0.35-79.55) minutes. Usefulness of the content and worksheet pages assessed via a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) was 5.08 (SD = 1.59) and 4.26 (SD = 2.03), respectively. Participants were likely to recommend WISE to other women undergoing cancer treatment (mean = 6.11; SD = 1.05). The majority of participants personalized WISE work and symptom strategies. Overall, participants agreed that WISE content pages were useful and would recommend WISE for other breast cancer survivors. Results support that majority of breast cancer survivors, undergoing treatment with curative intent, accessed a web-based intervention that provided personalized information on workplace and symptom strategies.

Results from a prospective longitudinal survey of employment and work outcomes in newly diagnosed cancer patients during and after curative-intent chemotherapy: A Wisconsin Oncology Network study.

BACKGROUND: Postcancer work limitations may affect a substantial proportion of patients and contribute to the "financial toxicity" of cancer treatment. The degree and nature of work limitations and employment outcomes are poorly understood for cancer patients, particularly in the immediate period of transition after active treatment. We prospectively examined employment, work ability, and work limitations during and after treatment. METHODS: A total of 120 patients receiving curative therapy who were employed prior to their cancer diagnosis and who intended to work during or after end of treatment (EOT) completed surveys at baseline (pretreatment), EOT, and 3, 6, and 12 months after EOT. Surveys included measures of employment, work ability, and work limitations. Descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, means with standard deviations) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 111 participants completed the baseline survey. On average, participants were 48 years of age and were mostly white (95%) and female (82%) with a diagnosis of breast cancer (69%). Full-time employment decreased during therapy (from 88% to 50%) and returned to near prediagnosis levels by 12-month follow-up (78%). Work-related productivity loss due to health was high during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to report the effects of curative intent cancer therapy on employment, work ability, and work limitations both during and after treatment. Perceived work ability was generally high overall 12 months after EOT, although a minority reported persistent difficulty. A prospective analysis of factors (eg, job type, education, symptoms) most associated with work limitations is underway to assist in identifying at-risk patients.

Beyond the corrective action hierarchy: A systems approach to organizational change.

BACKGROUND: Many patient safety organizations recommend the use of the action hierarchy (AH) to identify strong corrective actions following an investigative analysis of patient harm events. Strong corrective actions, such as forcing functions and equipment standardization, improve patient safety by either preventing the occurrence of active failures (i.e. errors or violations) or reducing their consequences if they do occur. PROBLEM: We propose that the emphasis on implementing strong fixes that incrementally improve safety one event at a time is necessary, yet insufficient, for improving safety. This singular focus has detracted from the pursuit of major changes that transform systems safety by targeting the latent conditions which consistently underlie active failures. To date, however, there are no standardized models or methods that enable patient safety professionals to assess, develop and implement systems changes to improve patient safety. APPROACH: We propose a multifaceted definition of 'systems change'. Based on this definition, various types and levels of systems change are described. A rubric for determining the extent to which a specific corrective action reflects a 'systems change' is provided. This rubric incorporates four fundamental dimensions of systems change: scope, breadth, depth and degree. Scores along these dimensions can then be used to classify corrective actions within our proposed systems change hierarchy (SCH). CONCLUSION: Additional research is needed to validate the proposed rubric and SCH. However, when used in conjunction with the AH, the SCH perspective will serve to foster a more holistic and transformative approach to patient safety.

A randomized trial of immediate versus delayed survivorship care plan receipt on patient satisfaction and knowledge of diagnosis and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) and care-planning sessions have been recommended for over a decade, yet evidence for their benefit remains mixed. In a randomized trial, changes in survivor knowledge and satisfaction before and after the receipt of an SCP were assessed. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer who had completed curative-intent treatment were randomized to immediate versus delayed receipt of an individualized SCP. All participants completed the modified Wisconsin Survey of Cancer Diagnosis and Management in Breast Cancer and the Preparing for Life As a New Survivor survey to assess individual knowledge about cancer diagnosis, treatment, side effects, and follow-up as well as satisfaction with communication and care coordination. Surveys were completed at baseline, at 4 weeks (before delayed receipt), and again at 12 weeks (after all participants had received SCPs); the primary outcome was change in knowledge at 4 weeks. RESULTS: In total, 127 eligible women were randomized. An improvement in individual knowledge was observed between baseline and week 12 for both arms combined (+1.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-2.3; P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the change in knowledge from baseline through week 4 between the arms. No significant change occurred for satisfaction scores over time. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial of immediate versus delayed SCP receipt demonstrated a small improvement (4%) in survivor knowledge. However, this improvement did not appear to be related to SCP provision. The authors hypothesized that the improvement was because of repeated administration of the knowledge survey. If improved survivor knowledge is a goal, then strategies beyond the 1-time provision and review of an SCP should be explored.

A Statewide Surgical Coaching Program Provides Opportunity for Continuous Professional Development.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop and evaluate a video-based coaching program for board-eligible/certified surgeons. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Multiple disciplines utilize coaching for continuous professional development; however, coaching is not routinely employed for practicing surgeons. METHODS: Peer-nominated surgeons were trained as coaches then paired with participant surgeons. After setting goals, each coaching pair reviewed video-recorded operations performed by the participating surgeon. Coaching sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to identify topics discussed. The effectiveness with which our coaches were able to utilize the core principles and activities of coaching was evaluated using 3 different approaches: self-evaluation; evaluation by the participants; and assessment by the study team. Surveys of participating surgeons and coach-targeted interviews provided general feedback on the program. All measures utilized a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from 1 (low) to 5 (high). RESULTS: Coach-participant surgeon pairs targeted technical, cognitive, and interpersonal aspects of performance. Other topics included managing intraoperative stress. Mean objective ratings of coach effectiveness was 3.1 ±â€Š0.7, ranging from 2.0 to 5.0 on specific activities of coaching. Subjective ratings by coaches and participants were consistently higher. Coaches reported that the training provided effectively prepared them to facilitate coaching sessions. Participants were similarly positive about interactions with their coaches. Identified barriers were related to audio-video technology and scheduling of sessions. Overall, participants were satisfied with their experience (mean 4.4 ±â€Š0.7) and found the coaching program valuable (mean 4.7 ±â€Š0.7). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of cross-institutional surgical coaching for the continuous professional development of practicing surgeons, demonstrating perceived value among participants, as well as logistical challenges for implementing this evidence-based program. Future research is necessary to evaluate the impact of coaching on practice change and patient outcomes.

Understanding Why Quality Initiatives Succeed or Fail: A Sociotechnical Systems Perspective.

Efforts to implement quality improvements in surgery are notoriously problematic. One needs to look no farther than recent attempts to implement checklists, team training, and surgical briefings. These interventions have been empirically shown to improve team communication and performance. Yet numerous barriers to implementation have limited their broad adoption and use. Apparently, knowing the remedy (intervention) does not translate into knowing how to administer (implement) it. Or in surgical terms, knowing "what" procedure needs to be performed does not necessarily mean that one knows "how" to perform it. Surgeons serve a vital leadership role in driving quality and patient safety initiatives in the operating room. Achieving success requires both an in-depth understanding of the intervention and the complex dynamics of the elements involved in the implementation process. To aid in this endeavor, the present article describes a Model for Understanding System Transitions Associated with the Implementation of New Goals (MUSTAING). The model highlights important variables associated with implementation success. It also provides a tool for diagnosing why certain interventions may not have worked as intended so that improvements in the implementation process can be made. Finally, the model offers a general framework for guiding future implementation or "how to" research.

Flow disruptions during trauma care.

BACKGROUND: Flow disruptions (FDs) are deviations from the progression of care that compromise safety or efficiency. The frequency and specific causes of FDs remain poorly documented in trauma care. We undertook this study to identify and quantify the rate of FDs during various phases of trauma care. METHODS: Seven trained observers studied a Level I trauma center over 2 months. Observers recorded details on FDs using a validated Tablet-PC data collection tool during various phases of care-trauma bay, imaging, operating room (OR)-and recorded work-system variables including breakdowns in communication and coordination, environmental distractions, equipment issues, and patient factors. RESULTS: Researchers observed 86 trauma cases including 72 low-level and 14 high-level activations. Altogether, 1,759 FDs were recorded (20.4/case). High-level trauma comprised a significantly higher number (p = 0.0003) and rate of FDs (p = 0.0158) than low-level trauma. Across the three phases of trauma care, there was a significant effect on FD number (p < 0.0001) and FD rate (p = 0.0005), with the highest in the OR, followed by computed tomography. The highest rates of FD per case and per hour were related to breakdowns in coordination. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest direct observational study of the trauma process conducted to date. Complexities associated with the critical patient who arrives in the trauma bay lead to a high prevalence of disruptions related to breakdowns in coordination, communication, equipment issues, and environmental factors. Prospective observation allows individual hospitals to identify and analyze these systemic deficiencies. Appropriate interventions can then be evaluated to streamline the care provided to trauma patients.

Dashboarding to Monitor Machine-Learning-Based Clinical Decision Support Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Existing monitoring of machine-learning-based clinical decision support (ML-CDS) is focused predominantly on the ML outputs and accuracy thereof. Improving patient care requires not only accurate algorithms but also systems of care that enable the output of these algorithms to drive specific actions by care teams, necessitating expanding their monitoring. OBJECTIVES: In this case report, we describe the creation of a dashboard that allows the intervention development team and operational stakeholders to govern and identify potential issues that may require corrective action by bridging the monitoring gap between model outputs and patient outcomes. METHODS: We used an iterative development process to build a dashboard to monitor the performance of our intervention in the broader context of the care system. RESULTS: Our investigation of best practices elsewhere, iterative design, and expert consultation led us to anchor our dashboard on alluvial charts and control charts. Both the development process and the dashboard itself illuminated areas to improve the broader intervention. CONCLUSION: We propose that monitoring ML-CDS algorithms with regular dashboards that allow both a context-level view of the system and a drilled down view of specific components is a critical part of implementing these algorithms to ensure that these tools function appropriately within the broader care system.

Academic Detailing as a Health Information Technology Implementation Method: Supporting the Design and Implementation of an Emergency Department-Based Clinical Decision Support Tool to Prevent Future Falls.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision support (CDS) tools that incorporate machine learning-derived content have the potential to transform clinical care by augmenting clinicians' expertise. To realize this potential, such tools must be designed to fit the dynamic work systems of the clinicians who use them. We propose the use of academic detailing-personal visits to clinicians by an expert in a specific health IT tool-as a method for both ensuring the correct understanding of that tool and its evidence base and identifying factors influencing the tool's implementation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess academic detailing as a method for simultaneously ensuring the correct understanding of an emergency department-based CDS tool to prevent future falls and identifying factors impacting clinicians' use of the tool through an analysis of the resultant qualitative data. METHODS: Previously, our team designed a CDS tool to identify patients aged 65 years and older who are at the highest risk of future falls and prompt an interruptive alert to clinicians, suggesting the patient be referred to a mobility and falls clinic for an evidence-based preventative intervention. We conducted 10-minute academic detailing interviews (n=16) with resident emergency medicine physicians and advanced practice providers who had encountered our CDS tool in practice. We conducted an inductive, team-based content analysis to identify factors that influenced clinicians' use of the CDS tool. RESULTS: The following categories of factors that impacted clinicians' use of the CDS were identified: (1) aspects of the CDS tool's design (2) clinicians' understanding (or misunderstanding) of the CDS or referral process, (3) the busy nature of the emergency department environment, (4) clinicians' perceptions of the patient and their associated fall risk, and (5) the opacity of the referral process. Additionally, clinician education was done to address any misconceptions about the CDS tool or referral process, for example, demonstrating how simple it is to place a referral via the CDS and clarifying which clinic the referral goes to. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the use of academic detailing for supporting the implementation of health information technologies, allowing us to identify factors that impacted clinicians' use of the CDS while concurrently educating clinicians to ensure the correct understanding of the CDS tool and intervention. Thus, academic detailing can inform both real-time adjustments of a tool's implementation, for example, refinement of the language used to introduce the tool, and larger scale redesign of the CDS tool to better fit the dynamic work environment of clinicians.

Mapping the process of ICU care delivery to improve treatment decisions in acute respiratory failure.

Evidence suggests system-level norms and care processes influence individual patients' medical decisions, including end-of-life decisions for patients with critical illnesses like acute respiratory failure. Yet, little is known about how these processes unfold over the course of a patient's critical illness in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our objective was to map current-state ICU care delivery processes for patients with acute respiratory failure and to identify opportunities to improve the process. We conducted a process mapping study at two academic medical centers, using focus groups and semi-structured interviews. The 70 participants represented 17 distinct roles in ICU care, including interprofessional medical ICU and palliative care clinicians, surrogate decision makers, and patient survivors. Participants refined and endorsed a process map of current-state care delivery for all patients admitted to the ICU with acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. The process contains four critical periods for active deliberation about the use of life-sustaining treatments. However, active deliberation steps are inconsistently performed and frequently disrupted, leading to prolongation of life-sustaining treatment by default, without consideration of patients' individual goals and priorities. Interventions to standardize active deliberation in the ICU may improve treatment decisions for ICU patients with acute respiratory failure.

Flow disruptions in trauma care handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Effective handoffs of care are critical for maintaining patient safety and avoiding communication problems. Using the flow disruption observation technique, we examined transitions of care along the trauma pathway. We hypothesized that more transitions would lead to more disruptions, and that different pathways would have different numbers of disruptions. METHODS: We trained observers to identify flow disruptions, and then followed 181 patients from arrival in the emergency department (ED) to the completion of care using a specially formatted PC tablet. We mapped each patient's journey and recorded and classified flow disruptions during transition periods into seven categories. RESULTS: Mapping the transitions of care shows that approximately four of five patients were assessed in the ED, transferred to imaging for further diagnostics, and then returned to the ED. There was a mean of 2.2 ± 0.09 transitions per patient, a mean of 0.66 ± 0.15 flow disruptions per patient, and 0.31 ± 0.07 flow disruptions per transition. Most of these (53%) were related to coordination problems. Although disruptions did not rise with more transitions, patients who went directly to the operating room or needed direct admission to intensive care unit were significantly more likely (P=0.0028) to experience flow disruptions than those who took other, less expedited pathways. CONCLUSIONS: Transitions in trauma care are vulnerable to systems problems and human errors. Coordination problems predominate as the cause. Sicker, time-pressured, and more at-risk patients are more likely to experience problems. Safety practices used in motor racing and other industries might be applied to address these problems.

Impact of Interprofessional Teamwork on Aligning Intensive Care Unit Care with Patient Goals: A Qualitative Study of Transactive Memory Systems.

Rationale: Although aligning care with patient goals is fundamental to critical care, this process is often delayed and leads to conflict among patients, families, and intensive care unit (ICU) teams. Interprofessional collaboration within ICU teams is an opportunity to improve goal-aligned care, yet this collaboration is poorly understood. A better understanding of how ICU team members work together to provide goal-aligned care may identify new strategies for improvement. Objectives: Transactive memory systems is a theory of group mind that explains how high-performing teams use a shared memory and collective cognition. We applied this theory to characterize the process of interprofessional collaboration within ICU teams and its relationship with goal-aligned care. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of focus group (n = 10) and semistructured interview (n = 8) transcripts, gathered during a parent study at two academic medical centers on the process of ICU care delivery in acute respiratory failure. Participants (N = 70) included interprofessional ICU and palliative care team members, surrogates, and patient survivors. We used directed content analysis, applying transactive memory systems theory and its major components (specialization, coordination, credibility) to examine ICU team collaboration. Results: Participants described each ICU profession as having a specialized role in aligning care with patient goals. Different professions have different opportunities to gather knowledge about patient goals and priorities, which results in dispersion of this knowledge among different team members. To share and use this dispersed knowledge, ICU teams rely on an informal coordination process and "side conversations." This process is a workaround for formal channels (e.g., health records, interprofessional rounds) that do not adequately convey knowledge about patient goals. This informal process does not occur if team members are discouraged from asserting their knowledge because of hierarchy or lack of psychological safety. Conversely, coordination succeeds when team members recognize each other as credible sources of valued knowledge. Conclusions: We found that ICU team members work together to align care with patient goals and priorities, using transactive memory systems. The successful function of these systems can be disrupted or promoted by ICU organizational and cultural factors, which are potential targets for efforts to increase goal-aligned care.

Understanding the "Swiss Cheese Model" and Its Application to Patient Safety.

ABSTRACT: This article reviews several key aspects of the Theory of Active and Latent Failures, typically referred to as the Swiss cheese model of human error and accident causation. Although the Swiss cheese model has become well known in most safety circles, there are several aspects of its underlying theory that are often misunderstood. Some authors have dismissed the Swiss cheese model as an oversimplification of how accidents occur, whereas others have attempted to modify the model to make it better equipped to deal with the complexity of human error in health care. This narrative review aims to provide readers with a better understanding and greater appreciation of the Theory of Active and Latent Failures upon which the Swiss cheese model is based. The goal is to help patient safety professionals fully leverage the model and its associated tools when performing a root cause analysis as well as other patient safety activities.

Using flow disruptions to understand healthcare system safety: A systematic review of observational studies.

This systematic review provides information on the methodologies, measurements and classification systems used in observational studies of flow disruptions in clinical environments. The PRISMA methodology was applied and authors searched two databases (PubMed and Web of Science) for studies meeting the following inclusion criteria: (a) were conducted in a healthcare setting, (b) explored systems-factors leading to deviations in care processes, (c) were prospective and observational, (d) classified observations, and (e) were original research studies published in peer-reviewed journals. Thirty studies were analyzed and a variety of methods were identified for observer training, data collection and observation classification. Although primarily applied in surgery, comparable research has been successfully conducted in other venues such as trauma care, and delivery rooms. The findings of this review were synthesized into a framework of considerations for conducting rigorous methodological studies aimed at understanding clinical systems.

Collaborative design and implementation of a clinical decision support system for automated fall-risk identification and referrals in emergency departments.

Of the 3 million older adults seeking fall-related emergency care each year, nearly one-third visited the Emergency Department (ED) in the previous 6 months. ED providers have a great opportunity to refer patients for fall prevention services at these initial visits, but lack feasible tools for identifying those at highest-risk. Existing fall screening tools have been poorly adopted due to ED staff/provider burden and lack of workflow integration. To address this, we developed an automated clinical decision support (CDS) system for identifying and referring older adult ED patients at risk of future falls. We engaged an interdisciplinary design team (ED providers, health services researchers, information technology/predictive analytics professionals, and outpatient Falls Clinic staff) to collaboratively develop a system that successfully met user requirements and integrated seamlessly into existing ED workflows. Our rapid-cycle development and evaluation process employed a novel combination of human-centered design, implementation science, and patient experience strategies, facilitating simultaneous design of the CDS tool and intervention implementation strategies. This included defining system requirements, systematically identifying and resolving usability problems, assessing barriers and facilitators to implementation (e.g., data accessibility, lack of time, high patient volumes, appointment availability) from multiple vantage points, and refining protocols for communicating with referred patients at discharge. ED physician, nurse, and patient stakeholders were also engaged through online surveys and user testing. Successful CDS design and implementation required integration of multiple new technologies and processes into existing workflows, necessitating interdisciplinary collaboration from the onset. By using this iterative approach, we were able to design and implement an intervention meeting all project goals. Processes used in this Clinical-IT-Research partnership can be applied to other use cases involving automated risk-stratification, CDS development, and EHR-facilitated care coordination.

Implementing a human factors approach to RCA2 : Tools, processes and strategies.

Root Cause Analysis and Action (RCA2 ) guidelines offer fundamental improvements to traditional RCA. Yet, these guidelines lack robust methods to support a human factors analysis of patient harm events and development of systems-level interventions. We recently integrated a complement of human factors tools into the RCA2 process to address this gap. These tools include the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), the Human Factors Intervention Matrix (HFIX), and a multiple-criterion decision tool called FACES, for selecting effective HFIX solutions. We describe each of these tools and illustrate how they can be integrated into RCA2 to create a robust human factors RCA process called HFACS-RCA2 . We also present qualitative results from an 18-month implementation study within a large academic health center. Results demonstrate how HFACS-RCA2 can foster a more comprehensive, human factors analysis of serious patient harm events and the identification of broader system interventions. Following HFACS-RCA2 implementation, RCA team members (risk managers and quality improvement advisors) also experienced greater satisfaction in their work, leadership gained more trust in RCA findings and recommendations, and the transparency of the RCA process increased. Effective strategies for overcoming implementation barriers, including changes in roles, responsibilities and workload will also be presented.

Development and evaluation of an observational tool for assessing surgical flow disruptions and their impact on surgical performance.

BACKGROUND: Many researchers have previously explored the correlation between surgical flow disruptions and adverse events in cardiac surgery; however, there is no reliable tool to prospectively categorize surgical flow disruptions and the conditions that predispose a surgical team to adverse events. METHODS: Two independent raters of different medical and human factors expertise observed 12 cardiovascular operations and iteratively designed a surgical flow disruption tool (SFDT) to characterize surgical flow disruptions and the latent factors that contribute to adverse events. Categories to characterize surgical flow disruptions were created based on human factors models of human error. After the design period, both raters observed ten surgical cases using the tool to assess validity and inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Rating agreement (weighted kappa) for each category across the ten surgeries was moderate to very high, resulting in strong inter-rater reliability for each category on the surgical flow disruption tool. Use of the SFDT was simple and clear for observers of diverse backgrounds, including human factors experts and medical personnel. CONCLUSIONS: This research depicts the development and utility of a tool to analyze surgical flow disruptions in the cardiovascular operating room with satisfactory inter-rater reliability. This tool is an important first step in systematically categorizing and measuring surgical flow disruptions and their impact on patient safety in the operating room.

Development and Assessment of the Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Rubric.

Importance: Surgical coaching continues to gain momentum as an innovative method for continuous professional development. A tool to measure the performance of a surgical coach is needed to provide formative feedback to coaches for continued skill development and to assess the fidelity of a coaching intervention for future research and dissemination. Objective: To evaluate the validity of the Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Rubric (WiSCoR), a novel tool to assess the performance of a peer surgical coach. Design, Setting, and Participants: Surgical coaching sessions from November 2014 through February 2018 conducted by 2 statewide peer surgical coaching programs were audio recorded and transcribed. Twelve raters used WiSCoR to rate the performance of the surgical coach for each session. The study included peer surgical coaches in the Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Program (n = 8) and the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative coaching program (n = 15). The data were analyzed in 2019. Interventions or Exposures: Use of WiSCoR to rate peer surgical coaching sessions. Main Outcomes and Measures: There were 282 WiSCoR ratings from the 106 coaching sessions included in the study. WiSCoR was evaluated using a framework, including inter-rater reliability assessed with Gwet weighted agreement coefficent. Descriptive statistics of WiSCoR were calculated. Results: Eight coaches (35%) and 11 coachees (29%) were from the Wisconsin Surgical Program and 15 coaches (65%) and 27 coachees (71%) were from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative. The validity of WiSCoR is supported by high interrater reliability (Gwet weighted agreement coefficient, 0.87) as well as a weakly positive correlation of WiSCoR to coachee ratings of coaches (r = 0.22; P = .04), rigorous content development, consistent rater training, and the association of WiSCoR with coach and coaching program development. The mean (SD) overall coach performance rating using WiSCoR was 3.23 (0.82; range, 1-5). Conclusions and Relevance: WiSCoR is a reliable measure that can assess the performance of a surgical coach, inform fidelity to coaching principles, and provide formative feedback to surgical coaches. While coachee ratings may reflect coachee satisfaction, they are not able to determine the quality of a coach.