Using the Operating Room Black Box to Assess Surgical Team Member Adaptation Under Uncertainty: An Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: Identify how surgical team members uniquely contribute to teamwork and adapt their teamwork skills during instances of uncertainty. BACKGROUND: The importance of surgical teamwork in preventing patient harm is well documented. Yet, little is known about how key roles (nurse, anesthesiologist, surgeon, and medical trainee) uniquely contribute to teamwork during instances of uncertainty, particularly when adapting to and rectifying an intraoperative adverse event (IAE). METHODS: Audiovisual data of 23 laparoscopic cases from a large community teaching hospital were prospectively captured using OR Black Box. Human factors researchers retrospectively coded videos for teamwork skills (backup behavior, coordination, psychological safety, situation assessment, team decision-making, and leadership) by team role under 2 conditions of uncertainty: associated with an IAE versus no IAE. Surgeons identified IAEs. RESULTS: In all, 1015 instances of teamwork skills were observed. Nurses adapted to IAEs by expressing more backup behavior skills (5.3× increase; 13.9 instances/hour during an IAE vs 2.2 instances/hour when no IAE) while surgeons and medical trainees expressed more psychological safety skills (surgeons: 3.6× increase; 30.0 instances/hour vs 6.6 instances/hour and trainees: 6.6× increase; 31.2 instances/hour vs 4.1 instances/hour). All roles expressed fewer situation assessment skills during an IAE versus no IAE. CONCLUSIONS: OR Black Box enabled the assessment of critically important details about how team members uniquely contribute during instances of uncertainty. Some teamwork skills were amplified, while others dampened when dealing with IAEs. The knowledge of how each role contributes to teamwork and adapts to IAEs should be used to inform the design of tailored interventions to strengthen interprofessional teamwork.

Canadian taTME expert collaboration (CaTaCO) position statement.

INTRODUCTION: Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to surgery for rectal cancer. The technique has gained significant popularity in the surgical community due to the promising ability to overcome technical difficulties related to the access of the distal pelvis. Recently, Norwegian surgeons issued a local moratorium related to potential issues with the safety of the procedure. Early adopters of taTME in Canada have recognized the need to create guidelines for its adoption and supervision. The objective of the statement is to provide expert opinion based on the best available evidence and authors' experience. METHODS: The procedure has been performed in Canada since 2014 at different institutions. In 2016, the first Canadian taTME congress was held in the city of Toronto, organized by two of the authors. In early 2019, a multicentric collaborative was established [The Canadian taTME expert Collaboration] which aimed at ensuring safe performance and adoption of taTME in Canada. Recently surgeons from 8 major Canadian rectal cancer centers met in the city of Toronto on December 7 of 2019, to discuss and develop a position statement. There in person, meeting was followed by 4 rounds of Delphi methodology. RESULTS: The generated document focused on the need to ensure a unified approach among rectal cancer surgeons across the country considering its technical complexity and potential morbidity. The position statement addressed four domains: surgical setting, surgeons' requirements, patient selection, and quality assurance. CONCLUSIONS: Authors agree transanal total mesorectal excision is technically demanding and has a significant risk for morbidity. As of now, there is uncertainty for some of the outcomes. We consider it is possible to safely adopt this operation and obtain adequate results, however for this purpose it is necessary to meet specific requirements in different domains.

Survival and peri-operative outcomes among patients with rectal cancer: the role of prior radiotherapy due to prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with rectal cancer (RCa) and prior radiation for prostate cancer (PCa) are clinically complicated and may have worse outcomes than other RCa patients. This study investigates the impact of previous radiation for PCa on survival for patients with RCa. METHOD: We conducted a population-based study identifying men who underwent surgical treatment of RCa from 2002 to 2010. Patients were classified into three cohorts: no prior PCa, prior PCa treated without radiotherapy, and prior PCa treated with radiotherapy. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included RCa surgical approach, ICU admission, length of stay, ER visits, and delayed formation of a new stoma. RESULTS: Seven thousand ninety-six men underwent surgery for RCa; 6867 patients had no prior PCa, 58 had prior PCa treated without radiotherapy, and 171 had prior PCa treated with radiotherapy. The 5-year overall survival was 62% (95% CI 61-64%) for patients without prior PCa, 46% (95% CI 25-65%) for patients with prior PCa treated without radiotherapy, and 42% (95% CI 29-54%) for patients with prior PCa treated with radiotherapy (p < 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, patients with prior PCa treated with radiotherapy were at increased risk of death (aHR 1.38, 95% CI 1.12-1.69) compared to those without prior PCa. Furthermore, patients with prior PCa treated with radiotherapy had a significantly increased risk of resection with permanent stoma. CONCLUSIONS: Prior radiotherapy for PCa is a poor prognostic factor in RCa patients with significantly increased risk of death. Additionally, patients with prior radiotherapy for PCa are more likely to require a permanent stoma.

Access to trauma systems in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is a leading cause of morbidity, potential years of life lost and health care expenditure in Canada and around the world. Trauma systems have been established across North America to provide comprehensive injury care and to lead injury control efforts. We sought to describe the current status of trauma systems in Canada and Canadians' access to acute, multidisciplinary trauma care. METHODS: A national survey was used to identify the locations and capabilities of adult trauma centers across Canada and to identify the catchment populations they serve. Geographic information science methods were used to map the locations of Level I and Level II trauma centers and to define 1-hour road travel times around each trauma center. Data from the 2006 Canadian Census were used to estimate populations within and outside 1-hour access to definitive trauma care. RESULTS: In Canada, 32 Level I and Level II trauma centers provide definitive trauma care and coordinate the efforts of their surrounding trauma systems. Most Canadians (77.5%) reside within 1-hour road travel catchments of Level I or Level II centers. However, marked geographic disparities in access persist. Of the 22.5% of Canadians who live more than an hour away from a Level I or Level II trauma centers, all are in rural and remote regions. DISCUSSION: Access to high quality acute trauma care is well established across parts of Canada but a clear urban/rural divide persists. Regional efforts to improve short- and long-term outcomes after severe trauma should focus on the optimization of access to pre-hospital care and acute trauma care in rural communities using locally relevant strategies or novel care delivery options.

Laparoscopic pancreatectomy: indications and outcomes.

The application of minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic resection for benign and malignant diseases has been growing in the last two decades. Studies have demonstrated that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is feasible and safe, and many of them show that compared to open distal pancreatectomy, LDP has decreased blood loss and length of hospital stay, and equivalent post-operative complication rates and short-term oncologic outcomes. LDP is becoming the procedure of choice for benign or small low-grade malignant lesions in the distal pancreas. Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) has not yet been widely adopted. There is no clear evidence in favor of MIPD over open pancreaticoduodenectomy in operative time, blood loss, length of stay or rate of complications. Robotic surgery has recently been applied to pancreatectomy, and many of the advantages of laparoscopy over open surgery have been observed in robotic surgery. Laparoscopic enucleation is considered safe for patients with small, benign or low-grade malignant lesions of the pancreas that is amenable to parenchyma-preserving procedure. As surgeons' experience with advanced laparoscopic and robotic skills has been growing around the world, new innovations and breakthrough in minimally invasive pancreatic procedures will evolve.