ABSTRACT
Background: The team timeout (TTO) is a safety checklist to be performed by the surgical team prior to incision. Exchange of critical information is, however, important not only before but also during an operation and members of surgical teams frequently feel insufficiently informed by the operating surgeon about the ongoing procedure. To improve the exchange of critical information during surgery, the StOP?-protocol was developed: At appropriate moments during the procedure, the leading surgeon briefly interrupts the operation and informs the team about the current Status (St) and next steps/objectives (O) of the operation, as well as possible Problems (P), and encourages questions of other team members (?). The StOP?-protocol draws attention to the team. Anticipating the occurrence of StOP?-protocols may support awareness of team processes and quality issues from the beginning and thus support other interventions such as the TTO; however, it also may signal an additional demand and contribute to a phenomenon akin to "checklist fatigue." We investigated if, and how, the introduction of the StOP?-protocol influenced TTO quality. Methods: This was a prospective intervention study employing a pre-post design. In the visceral surgical departments of two university hospitals and one urban hospital the quality of 356 timeouts (out of 371 included operation) was assessed by external observers before (154) and after (202) the introduction of the StOP?-briefing. Timeout quality was rated in terms of timeout completeness (number of checklist items mentioned) and timeout quality (engagement, pace, social atmosphere, noise). Results: As compared to the baseline, after the implementation of the StOP?-protocol, observed timeouts had higher completeness ratings (F = 8.69, p = 0.003) and were rated by observers as higher in engagement (F = 13.48, p < 0.001), less rushed (F = 14.85, p < 0.001), in a better social atmosphere (F = 5.83, p < 0.016) and less noisy (F = 5.35, p < 0.022). Conclusion: Aspects of TTO are affected by the anticipation of StOP?-protocols. However, rather than harming the timeout goals by inducing "checklist fatigue," it increases completeness and quality of the team timeout.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Operations require collaboration between surgeons, anaesthetia professionals, and nurses. The aim of this study was to determine whether intraoperative briefings influence patient outcomes. METHODS: In a before-and-after controlled trial (9 months baseline; 9 months intervention), intraoperative briefings were introduced in four general surgery centres between 2015 and 2018. During the operation, the responsible surgeon (most senior surgeon present) briefed the surgical team using the StOP? protocol about: progress of the operation (Status), next steps (Objectives), possible problems (Problems), and encouraged asking questions (?). Differences between baseline and intervention were analysed regarding surgical-site infections (primary outcome), mortality, unplanned reoperations, and duration of hospital stay (secondary outcomes), using inverse probability of treatment (IPT) weighting based on propensity scores. RESULTS: In total, 8256 patients underwent surgery in the study. Endpoint data were available for 7745 patients (93.8 per cent). IPT-weighted and adjusted intention-to-treat analyses showed no differences in surgical-site infections between baseline and intervention (9.8 versus 9.6 per cent respectively; adjusted difference (AD) -0.15 (95 per cent c.i. -1.45 to 1.14) per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.92, 95 per cent c.i. 0.83 to 1.15; P = 0.797), but there were reductions in mortality (1.6 versus 1.1 per cent; AD -0.54 (-1.04 to -0.03) per cent; OR 0.60, 0.39 to 0.92; P = 0.018), unplanned reoperations (6.4 versus 4.8 per cent; AD -1.66 (-2.69 to -0.62) per cent; OR 0.72, 0.59 to 0.89; P = 0.002), and fewer prolonged hospital stays (21.6 versus 19.8 per cent; AD -1.82 (-3.48 to -0.15) per cent; OR 0.87, 0.77 to 0.98; P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Short intraoperative briefings improve patient outcomes and should be performed routinely.
Outcomes of surgery depend on patient characteristics and surgeon expertise, but also on teamwork, notably communication. The present study introduces the StOP? protocol, in which the surgeon informs the team about the current status (St), objectives regarding next steps (O), and potential problems (P), and encourages the team to ask questions and raise concerns (?). The results suggest an effect of the StOP? intervention on patient mortality, risk of unplanned reoperation, and duration of hospital stay, but not on surgical-site infections. The study is promising regarding the effect of structured intraoperative communication on important patient outcomes. The study compared patient outcomes at baseline and after implementation of the StOP? protocol, which enhances exchange of structured information within the interdisciplinary surgical team during the course of the operation. The intention-to-treat analyses in this multicentre before-and-after study of 8256 patients undergoing general surgery showed no differences between baseline and intervention for surgical-site infections, but revealed reduced mortality and unplanned reoperations, and fewer prolonged hospital stays during the intervention period.
Subject(s)
Intraoperative Period , Patient Care Team , Surgical Procedures, Operative/methods , Controlled Before-After Studies , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surgical Procedures, Operative/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Background: Teams that regularly step back from action and deliberately reflect on their performance and strategies show higher performance. Ad hoc emergency teams with changing team composition cannot develop such habits but may engage in short postaction reflection to discuss shortcomings of past performance and potential adaptations of their strategies for future similar tasks. This study aimed to test the effect of a short postaction self-led reflective team briefing on resuscitation performance in a simulator setting in terms of three performance parameters: hands-on time, coordination between chest compression and ventilation, and defibrillation. Methods: We performed a randomised controlled trial including 56 ad hoc formed teams of three fourth-year medical students each. All groups performed a resuscitation task, followed by a self-guided reflective briefing, based on a general instruction (n=28 teams), or an unrelated discussion session (control condition; n=29), followed by a second resuscitation task in the same team composition. Results: Adjusted for performance in the first task, teams in the reflection condition showed higher performance gain in the second resuscitation than teams in the control condition (6.21 percentage points (95% CI 1.31 to 11.10, p<0.001)) for basic hands-on performance; 15.0 percentage points (95% CI 2 to 28, p<0.001) for coordinative performance but non-significantly lower performance for defibrillation (-9%, 95% CI -27% to -9%, p=0.312). Conclusion: Even very short self-led postaction reflective briefings enhance basic resuscitation performance in ad hoc groups but may not influence more complex aspects of the task. We recommend including short self-led team debriefings as part of simulator training.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Tense communication and disruptive behaviors during surgery have often been attributed to surgeons' personality or hierarchies, while situational triggers for tense communication were neglected. Goals of this study were to assess situational triggers of tense communication in the operating room and to assess its impact on collaboration quality within the surgical team. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The prospective observational study was performed in two university hospitals in Europe. Trained external observers assessed communication in 137 elective abdominal operations led by 30 different main surgeons. Objective observations were related to perceived collaboration quality by all members of the surgical team. A total of 340 tense communication episodes were observed (= 0.57 per hour); mean tensions in surgeries with tensions was 1.21 per hour. Individual surgeons accounted for 24% of the variation in tensions, while situational aspects accounted for 76% of variation. A total of 72% of tensions were triggered by coordination problems; 21.2% by task-related problems and 9.1% by other issues. More tensions were related to lower perceived teamwork quality for all team members except main surgeons. Coordination-triggered tensions significantly lowered teamwork quality for second surgeons, scrub technicians and circulators. CONCLUSIONS: Although individual surgeons differ in their tense communication, situational aspects during the operation had a much more important influence on the occurrence of tensions, mostly triggered by coordination problems. Because tensions negatively impact team collaboration, surgical teams may profit from improving collaboration, for instance through training, or through reflexivity.
Subject(s)
Communication , Interprofessional Relations , Operating Rooms/standards , Patient Care Team/standards , Problem Behavior , Surgeons/psychology , Surgical Procedures, Operative/standards , Clinical Competence , Humans , Operating Rooms/organization & administration , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many surgeons report passion for their work, but not all tasks are likely to be satisfying. Little is known about how hospital surgeons spend their days, how they like specific tasks, and the role of core tasks (i.e. surgery-related tasks) versus tasks that may keep them from core tasks (e.g., administrative work). This study aimed at a more detailed picture of hospital surgeons' daily work - how much time they spend with different tasks, how they like them, and associations with satisfaction. METHODS: Hospital surgeons (N = 105) responded to a general survey, and 81 of these provided up to five daily questionnaires concerning daily activities and their attractiveness, as well as their job satisfaction. The data were analyzed using t-tests, analysis of variance, as well as analysis of covariance and repeated measures analysis of variance for comparing means across tasks. RESULTS: Among 14 tasks, surgery-related tasks took 21.2%, patient-related tasks 21.7% of the surgeons' time; 10.4% entailed meetings and communicating about patients, and 18.6% documentation and administration. The remaining time was spent with teaching, research, leadership and management, and not task-related activities (e.g. walking between rooms). Surgery was rated as most (4.25; SD = .66), administration as least attractive (2.63; SD = .78). A higher percentage of administration predicted lower perceived legitimacy; perceived legitimacy of administrative work predicted job satisfaction (r = .47). Residents were least satisfied; there were few gender differences. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons seem to thrive on their core tasks, most notably surgery. By contrast, administrative duties are likely perceived as keeping them from their core medical tasks. Increasing the percentage of medical tasks proper, notably surgery, and reducing administrative duties may contribute to hospital surgeons' job satisfaction.
Subject(s)
Job Satisfaction , Surgeons/psychology , Adult , Biomedical Research , Communication , Documentation , Female , Hospital Administration , Humans , Leadership , Male , Middle Aged , Physician-Patient Relations , Surgeons/organization & administration , Surveys and Questionnaires , Teaching , WorkloadABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Noise pollution in operation rooms may distract the surgical team members. In particular during phases of high task complexity, noise can jeopardize concentration. Phases of high complexity are related to task specificities and may thus be different for different members of the surgical team. STUDY DESIGN: Noise exposure was measured during 110 open abdominal surgeries. Distinguishing three phases (opening, main phase, and closing), noise was related to self-report of distraction levels by main and secondary surgeons, scrub nurses and anesthetists. RESULTS: Noise pollution was higher than recommended levels for concentrated work. Adjusted for duration, surgical type, and difficulty of the surgery, results showed that second surgeons are more likely distracted when noise pollution was high in the main phase; and anesthetists are more likely distracted when noise pollution was high during the closing phase. Main surgeons' and scrub nurses' concentration was not impaired by measured noise levels. CONCLUSIONS: In phases with higher concentration demands, noise pollution was particularly distracting for second surgeons and anesthetist, corresponding to their specific task demands (anesthetists) and experience (second surgeons). Reducing noise levels particularly in the main and closing phase of the surgery may reduce concentration impairments.
Subject(s)
Anesthetists/psychology , Attention , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Nurses/psychology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Surgeons/psychology , Abdomen/surgery , Humans , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Operating Rooms , Self Report , Surgical Procedures, OperativeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Case-irrelevant communication (CIC) is defined as "any conversation" irrelevant to the case. It includes small talk, but also communication related to other work issues besides the actual task. CIC during surgeries is generally seen as distracting, despite a lack of knowledge about the content of CIC and its regulation in terms of adjustments to the situation of CIC. Primary goal of the study was to evaluate CIC content; secondary goal was to evaluate whether surgical teams regulate CIC according to different concentration demands of surgical procedures. METHODS: In 125 surgeries, 1396 CIC events were observed. CIC were content coded into work-related CIC (pertaining to other tasks or work in general) and social CIC (pertaining to acquaintance talk, gossip, or private conversation). The impact of different phases and the difficulty of the surgical procedure on CIC were assessed. RESULTS: Work-related CIC were significantly more frequent (2.49 per hour, SD = 2.17) than social CIC (1.42 per hour, SD = 2.17). Across phases, frequency of work-related CIC was constant, whereas social CIC increased significantly across phases. In surgeries assessed as highly difficult by the surgeons, social CIC were observed at a lower frequency, and less work-related CIC were observed during the main phase compared to surgeries assessed as less difficult. CONCLUSION: The high proportion of work-related CIC indicates that surgical teams deal with other tasks during surgeries. Surgical teams adapt CIC according to the demands of the procedure. Hospital policies should support these adaptations rather than attempt to suppress CIC entirely.