{"title":"Using Broken Windows Theory to Examine Flow Disruptions in Surgical Care: A Multispecialty Comparison.","authors":"Asfandyar Khan, Scott A Shappell, Albert J Boquet","doi":"10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Minimally invasive innovations enhance procedural technology. However, healthcare quality demands addressing mental and physical workloads. This study analyzes flow disruptions uncovering specialty-specific patterns and systemic weaknesses, to enhance quality, processes, and patient safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-five cardiovascular, 40 orthopedic, 65 trauma care, and 30 neurosurgical cases were examined. The data were categorized using human factor taxonomy, and descriptive statistics were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing the four specialties using RIPCORD TWA taxonomy, cardiovascular and trauma care were translated into one disruption every 2.2 minutes, followed by neurosurgery with one disruption every 2.7 minutes and orthopedics with one disruption every 3.7 minutes. Interruptions were the highest percentage for cardiovascular and orthopedics, with 54% and 46% of flow disruptions. Trauma care was heavily affected by communication flow disruption with 33%. Layout and coordination issues accumulate 26% of flow disruptions in neurosurgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cardiovascular, orthopedics, trauma care, and neurosurgery each feature distinct workflows, risks, and teamwork dynamics, demanding tailored process improvements. By analyzing flow disruptions and systemic weaknesses, this study highlights patterns unique to each specialty, advocating for tailored interventions to enhance communication, coordination, layout optimization, and equipment usability for improved surgical safety and quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":48801,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Healthcare Quality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Healthcare Quality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000469","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Minimally invasive innovations enhance procedural technology. However, healthcare quality demands addressing mental and physical workloads. This study analyzes flow disruptions uncovering specialty-specific patterns and systemic weaknesses, to enhance quality, processes, and patient safety.
Methods: Twenty-five cardiovascular, 40 orthopedic, 65 trauma care, and 30 neurosurgical cases were examined. The data were categorized using human factor taxonomy, and descriptive statistics were applied.
Results: Comparing the four specialties using RIPCORD TWA taxonomy, cardiovascular and trauma care were translated into one disruption every 2.2 minutes, followed by neurosurgery with one disruption every 2.7 minutes and orthopedics with one disruption every 3.7 minutes. Interruptions were the highest percentage for cardiovascular and orthopedics, with 54% and 46% of flow disruptions. Trauma care was heavily affected by communication flow disruption with 33%. Layout and coordination issues accumulate 26% of flow disruptions in neurosurgery.
Conclusions: Cardiovascular, orthopedics, trauma care, and neurosurgery each feature distinct workflows, risks, and teamwork dynamics, demanding tailored process improvements. By analyzing flow disruptions and systemic weaknesses, this study highlights patterns unique to each specialty, advocating for tailored interventions to enhance communication, coordination, layout optimization, and equipment usability for improved surgical safety and quality.
期刊介绍:
The Journal for Healthcare Quality (JHQ), a peer-reviewed journal, is an official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality. JHQ is a professional forum that continuously advances healthcare quality practice in diverse and changing environments, and is the first choice for creative and scientific solutions in the pursuit of healthcare quality. It has been selected for coverage in Thomson Reuter’s Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index®, and Current Contents®.
The Journal publishes scholarly articles that are targeted to leaders of all healthcare settings, leveraging applied research and producing practical, timely and impactful evidence in healthcare system transformation. The journal covers topics such as:
Quality Improvement • Patient Safety • Performance Measurement • Best Practices in Clinical and Operational Processes • Innovation • Leadership • Information Technology • Spreading Improvement • Sustaining Improvement • Cost Reduction • Payment Reform