A Concern for Intraoperative Distractions and Interference: An Observational Study Identifying, Measuring, and Quantifying Both within the Operating Theatre.

Surgery Research and Practice Pub Date : 2021-12-11 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2021/9910290
Shane Keogh, Deirdre Laski
{"title":"A Concern for Intraoperative Distractions and Interference: An Observational Study Identifying, Measuring, and Quantifying Both within the Operating Theatre.","authors":"Shane Keogh,&nbsp;Deirdre Laski","doi":"10.1155/2021/9910290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Modern surgical research has broadened to include an interest into the investigation of surgical workflow. Rigorous analysis of the surgical process has a particular focus on distractions. Operating theatres are inherently full of distractions, many not pertinent to the surgical process. Distractions have the potential to increase surgeon stress, operative time, and complications. Our study aims to objectively identify, classify, and quantify distractions during the surgical process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>46 general surgical procedures were observed within a tertiary Irish hospital between June 2019 and October 2019. An established observational tool was used to apply a structured observation to all operations. Additionally, a nine-point ordinal behaviourally anchor scoring scale was used to assign an interference level to each distraction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The total operative observation time was 4605 minutes (mean = 100.11 minutes, std. deviation: 45.6 minutes). Overall, 855 intraoperative distractions were coded. On average, 18.58 distractions were coded per operation (std. deviation: 6.649; range: 5-34), with 11.14 distractions occurring per hour. Entering/exiting (<i>n</i> = 380, 42.88%) and case irrelevant communication (<i>n</i> = 251, 28.32%) occurred most frequently. Disruption rate was highest within the first (<i>n</i> = 275, 32%) and fourth operative quartiles (<i>n</i> = 342, 41%). Highest interference rates were observed from equipment issue and procedural interruptions. Anaesthetists initiated CIC more frequently (2.72 per operation), compared to nurses (1.57) and surgeons (1.17).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results confirm that distractions are prevalent within the operating theatre. Distractions contribute to significant interferences of surgical workflow. Steps can be taken to reduce overall prevalence and interference level by drawing upon a systems-based perspective. However, due to the ubiquitous nature of distractions, surgeons may need to develop skills to help them resume interrupted primary tasks so as to negate the effects distraction has on surgical outcomes. Data for the above have been presented as conference abstract in 28th International Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) Virtual Congress, 23-26 June 2020.</p>","PeriodicalId":30584,"journal":{"name":"Surgery Research and Practice","volume":"2021 ","pages":"9910290"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8684503/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9910290","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Modern surgical research has broadened to include an interest into the investigation of surgical workflow. Rigorous analysis of the surgical process has a particular focus on distractions. Operating theatres are inherently full of distractions, many not pertinent to the surgical process. Distractions have the potential to increase surgeon stress, operative time, and complications. Our study aims to objectively identify, classify, and quantify distractions during the surgical process.

Methods: 46 general surgical procedures were observed within a tertiary Irish hospital between June 2019 and October 2019. An established observational tool was used to apply a structured observation to all operations. Additionally, a nine-point ordinal behaviourally anchor scoring scale was used to assign an interference level to each distraction.

Results: The total operative observation time was 4605 minutes (mean = 100.11 minutes, std. deviation: 45.6 minutes). Overall, 855 intraoperative distractions were coded. On average, 18.58 distractions were coded per operation (std. deviation: 6.649; range: 5-34), with 11.14 distractions occurring per hour. Entering/exiting (n = 380, 42.88%) and case irrelevant communication (n = 251, 28.32%) occurred most frequently. Disruption rate was highest within the first (n = 275, 32%) and fourth operative quartiles (n = 342, 41%). Highest interference rates were observed from equipment issue and procedural interruptions. Anaesthetists initiated CIC more frequently (2.72 per operation), compared to nurses (1.57) and surgeons (1.17).

Conclusion: Our results confirm that distractions are prevalent within the operating theatre. Distractions contribute to significant interferences of surgical workflow. Steps can be taken to reduce overall prevalence and interference level by drawing upon a systems-based perspective. However, due to the ubiquitous nature of distractions, surgeons may need to develop skills to help them resume interrupted primary tasks so as to negate the effects distraction has on surgical outcomes. Data for the above have been presented as conference abstract in 28th International Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) Virtual Congress, 23-26 June 2020.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

对术中分心和干扰的关注:一项在手术室内识别、测量和量化两者的观察性研究。
背景:现代外科研究已经扩展到包括对手术工作流程的研究。对手术过程的严格分析特别关注分心。手术室本身就充满了让人分心的事情,其中许多与手术过程无关。分心有可能增加外科医生的压力、手术时间和并发症。我们的研究旨在客观地识别、分类和量化手术过程中的干扰。方法:2019年6月至2019年10月在爱尔兰一家三级医院观察了46例普通外科手术。使用已建立的观察工具对所有操作进行结构化观察。此外,一个9分的有序行为锚定评分量表被用来为每个分心分配干扰水平。结果:手术总观察时间4605 min,平均100.11 min,标准差45.6 min。总的来说,855个术中干扰被编码。平均每个操作编码18.58个干扰(标准差:6.649;范围:5-34),每小时发生11.14次分心。进入/退出(n = 380, 42.88%)和病例无关沟通(n = 251, 28.32%)发生频率最高。破坏率最高的是第一个四分位数(n = 275, 32%)和第四个四分位数(n = 342, 41%)。干扰率最高的是设备问题和程序中断。麻醉师(2.72例)比护士(1.57例)和外科医生(1.17例)更频繁地启动CIC。结论:我们的研究结果证实了在手术室中分心是普遍存在的。干扰是影响手术工作流程的重要因素。可以采取步骤,借鉴基于系统的观点,降低总体流行率和干扰程度。然而,由于分心无处不在,外科医生可能需要发展技能来帮助他们恢复中断的主要任务,以消除分心对手术结果的影响。上述数据已在2020年6月23日至26日举行的第28届欧洲内窥镜手术协会(EAES)虚拟大会上作为会议摘要提出。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: Surgery Research and Practice is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that provides a forum for surgeons and the surgical research community. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies focusing on clinical and laboratory research relevant to surgical practice and teaching, with an emphasis on findings directly affecting surgical management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信