6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systematic review of methods for quantifying teamwork in the operating theatre

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Teamwork in the operating theatre is becoming increasingly recognized as a major factor in clinical outcomes. Many tools have been developed to measure teamwork. Most fall into two categories: self‐assessment by theatre staff and assessment by observers. A critical and comparative analysis of the validity and reliability of these tools is lacking.

          Methods

          MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched following PRISMA guidelines. Content validity was assessed using measurements of inter‐rater agreement, predictive validity and multisite reliability, and interobserver reliability using statistical measures of inter‐rater agreement and reliability. Quantitative meta‐analysis was deemed unsuitable.

          Results

          Forty‐eight articles were selected for final inclusion; self‐assessment tools were used in 18 and observational tools in 28, and there were two qualitative studies. Self‐assessment of teamwork by profession varied with the profession of the assessor. The most robust self‐assessment tool was the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), although this failed to demonstrate multisite reliability. The most robust observational tool was the Non‐Technical Skills (NOTECHS) system, which demonstrated both test–retest reliability ( P > 0·09) and interobserver reliability (Rwg = 0·96).

          Conclusion

          Self‐assessment of teamwork by the theatre team was influenced by professional differences. Observational tools, when used by trained observers, circumvented this.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A prospective study of patient safety in the operating room.

          To better understand the operating room as a system and to identify system features that influence patient safety, we performed an analysis of operating room patient care using a prospective observational technique. A multidisciplinary team comprised of human factors experts and surgeons conducted prospective observations of 10 complex general surgery cases in an academic hospital. Minute-to-minute observations were recorded in the field, and later coded and analyzed. A qualitative analysis first identified major system features that influenced team performance and patient safety. A quantitative analysis of factors related to these systems features followed. In addition, safety-compromising events were identified and analyzed for contributing and compensatory factors. Problems in communication and information flow, and workload and competing tasks were found to have measurable negative impact on team performance and patient safety in all 10 cases. In particular, the counting protocol was found to significantly compromise case progression and patient safety. We identified 11 events that potentially compromised patient safety, allowing us to identify recurring factors that contributed to or mitigated the overall effect on the patient's outcome. This study demonstrates the role of prospective observational methods in exposing critical system features that influence patient safety and that can be the targets for patient safety initiatives. Communication breakdown and information loss, as well as increased workload and competing tasks, pose the greatest threats to patient safety in the operating room.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Teamwork and error in the operating room: analysis of skills and roles.

            To analyze the effects of surgical, anesthetic, and nursing teamwork skills on technical outcomes. The value of team skills in reducing adverse events in the operating room is presently receiving considerable attention. Current work has not yet identified in detail how the teamwork and communication skills of surgeons, anesthetists, and nurses affect the course of an operation. Twenty-six laparoscopic cholecystectomies and 22 carotid endarterectomies were studied using direct observation methods. For each operation, teams' skills were scored for the whole team, and for nursing, surgical, and anesthetic subteams on 4 dimensions (leadership and management [LM]; teamwork and cooperation; problem solving and decision making; and situation awareness). Operating time, errors in surgical technique, and other procedural problems and errors were measured as outcome parameters for each operation. The relationships between teamwork scores and these outcome parameters within each operation were examined using analysis of variance and linear regression. Surgical (F(2,42) = 3.32, P = 0.046) and anesthetic (F(2,42) = 3.26, P = 0.048) LM had significant but opposite relationships with operating time in each operation: operating time increased significantly with higher anesthetic but decreased with higher surgical LM scores. Errors in surgical technique had a strong association with surgical situation awareness (F(2,42) = 7.93, P < 0.001) in each operation. Other procedural problems and errors were related to the intraoperative LM skills of the nurses (F(5,1) = 3.96, P = 0.027). Detailed analysis of team interactions and dimensions is feasible and valuable, yielding important insights into relationships between nontechnical skills, technical performance, and operative duration. These results support the concept that interventions designed to improve teamwork and communication may have beneficial effects on technical performance and patient outcome.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Observational teamwork assessment for surgery: content validation and tool refinement.

              Effective teamwork is crucial for safe surgery. Failures in nontechnical and teamwork skills are frequently implicated in adverse events. The Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS) tool assesses teamwork of the entire team in the operating room. Empirical testing of OTAS has yet to explore the content validity of the tool. This was a cross-sectional observational study. Data were collected in 30 procedures by 2 trained researchers. Five teamwork behaviors were scored (ie, communication, leadership, cooperation, coordination, and monitoring) and behavior exemplar completion was recorded (phase 1). Expert operating room personnel (5 surgeons, 5 anesthesiologists, and 5 scrub nurses) assessed the content validity of the OTAS exemplar behaviors. Finally, a panel of operating room patient-safety experts refined the exemplars (phase 2). In total, the observability (presence/absence) of 130 exemplars was assessed by 2 blinded observers in 30 general surgical cases. Observer agreement was high (Cohen's κ ≥ 0.41) for 83.85% (109 of 130) of exemplar behaviors; 60.77% (79 of 130) of exemplar behaviors were observed frequently with high observer agreement. The majority of the exemplars were rated by expert operating room practitioners and an expert panel as substantial contributors to teamwork and patient safety. Based on expert consensus, 21 behavior exemplars were removed from OTAS and an additional 23 were modified. The exemplars of OTAS demonstrated very good content validity. Taken together with recent evidence on the construct validity of the tool, these findings demonstrate that OTAS is psychometrically robust for capturing teamwork in the operating room. Copyright © 2010 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                nick.li1069@gmail.com
                Journal
                BJS Open
                BJS Open
                10.1002/(ISSN)2474-9842
                BJS5
                BJS Open
                John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (Chichester, UK )
                2474-9842
                15 February 2018
                April 2018
                : 2
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/bjs5.2018.2.issue-2 )
                : 42-51
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of General Surgery Wexham Park Hospital Slough UK
                [ 2 ] Department of Medicine Imperial College London London UK
                [ 3 ] Department of Surgery and Cancer Imperial College London London UK
                [ 4 ] Nuffield Department of Surgery University of Oxford Oxford UK
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Dr N. Li, Department of General Surgery, Wexham Park Hospital, Slough SL2 4HL, UK (e‐mail: nick.li1069@ 123456gmail.com )
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1486-6492
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1011-7440
                Article
                BJS540
                10.1002/bjs5.40
                5952378
                29951628
                9792af69-eff1-49c6-ae1b-54941ae5f5d7
                © 2018 The Authors. BJS Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 04 September 2017
                : 28 November 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 10, Words: 5900
                Categories
                Systematic Review
                Systematic Reviews
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                bjs540
                April 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.4.0 mode:remove_FC converted:05.06.2018

                Comments

                Comment on this article