STOPS: A Coping Framework for Surgeons Who Experience Intraoperative Error.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the steps faculty surgeons take upon experiencing intraoperative error and synthesize these actions to offer a framework for coping with errors. BACKGROUND: While intraoperative errors are inevitable, formal training in error recovery is insufficient and there are no established curricula that teach surgeons how to deal with the intraoperative error. This is problematic because insufficient error recovery is detrimental to both patient outcomes and surgeon psychological well-being. METHODS: We conducted a thematic analysis. One-hour in-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with faculty surgeons from 3 hospitals. Surgeons described recent experiences with intraoperative error. Interviews were transcribed and coded. Analysis allowed for development of themes regarding responses to errors and coping strategies. RESULTS: Twenty-seven surgeons (30% female) participated. Upon completion of the analysis, themes emerged in 3 distinct areas: (1) Exigency, or a need for training surgical learners how to cope with intraoperative errors, (2) Learning, or how faculty surgeons themselves learned to cope with intraoperative errors, and (3) Responses, or how surgeons now handle intraoperative errors. The latter category was organized into the STOPS framework: Intraoperative errors could produce STOPS: Stop, Talk to your Team, Obtain Help, Plan, Succeed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study provides both novel insight into how surgeons cope with intraoperative errors and a framework that may be of great use to trainees and faculty alike.

Systematic Review of Procedural Skill Simulation in Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

ABSTRACT: Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have adopted procedural skill simulation, with researchers increasingly investigating simulation efforts in resource-strained settings. We aim to summarize the current state of procedural skill simulation research in LMICs focusing on methodology, clinical area, types of outcomes and cost, cost-effectiveness, and overall sustainability. We performed a comprehensive literature review of original articles that assessed procedural skill simulation from database inception until April 2022.From 5371 screened articles, 262 were included in this review. All included studies were in English. Most studies were observational cohort studies (72.9%) and focused on obstetrics and neonatal medicine (32.4%). Most measured outcome was the process of task performance (56.5%). Several studies mentioned cost (38.9%) or sustainability (29.8%). However, few articles included actual monetary cost information (11.1%); only 1 article assessed cost-effectiveness. Based on our review, future research of procedural skill simulation in LMICS should focus on more rigorous research, cost assessments, and on less studied areas.