Using a Checklist in Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Procedures

Human Factors Integration in Robotic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Using the example of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), we explore the methodological and practical challenges of technology integration in surgery, provide examples of evidence-based improvements, and discuss the importance of systems engineering and clinical human factors research and practice.

BACKGROUND

New operating room technologies offer potential benefits for patients and staff, yet also present challenges for physical, procedural, team, and organizational integration. Historically, RAS implementation has focused on establishing the technical skills of the surgeon on the console, and has not systematically addressed the new skills required for other team members, the use of the workspace, or the organizational changes.

RESULTS

Human factors studies of robotic surgery have demonstrated not just the effects of these hidden complexities on people, teams, processes, and proximal outcomes, but also have been able to analyze and explain in detail why they happen and offer methods to address them. We review studies on workload, communication, workflow, workspace, and coordination in robotic surgery, and then discuss the potential for improvement that these studies suggest within the wider healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

There is a growing need to understand and develop approaches to safety and quality improvement through human-systems integration at the frontline of care.Precis: The introduction of robotic surgery has exposed under-acknowledged complexities of introducing complex technology into operating rooms. We explore the methodological and practical challenges, provide examples of evidence-based improvements, and discuss the implications for systems engineering and clinical human factors research and practice.

What do nurses experience in communication when assisting in robotic surgery: an integrative literature review

BACKGROUND

Communication in surgery is integral to the fundamentals of perioperative nursing practice and patient safety. Research exploring team communication in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is evident in the literature but little attention has been focused on how the experiences of operating room nurses' communication affect safety, practice and patient care outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise current evidence regarding communication during robotic-assisted surgery as experienced by registered nurses.

DESIGN

An integrative literature review informed by Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) methodology was used to conduct a rigorous analysis and synthesis of evidence.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. CINAHL, Pubmed, PsychINFO and British Nursing Web of Science databases were searched using a Boolean strategy.

RESULTS

Twenty-five relevant papers were included in this literature review. Thematic analysis revealed two main themes with four related subthemes. The two main themes are: 'Adaptive operating room nursing in RAS' and 'RAS alters team dynamics'. The four subthemes are: 'Navigating disruptions in RAS', 'RAS heightens interdependence on team working', 'Augmented communicative workflow in RAS', and 'Professional empowerment to speak up'.

CONCLUSIONS

This integrative review identifies how current research largely focuses on communication in the wider OR team. However, current evidence lacks the input of nurses. Therefore, further evidence is needed to explore nurses' experiences to highlight their perspectives.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Robotics significantly benefit patients, and this review identifies different challenges that robotic-assisted surgery nurses encounter. A better understanding of the communication from the perspective of nurses is needed to guide future research, practice education, policy development and leadership/management.

Workflow disruptions in robot-assisted surgery

Surgical flow disruptions are unexpected deviations from the natural progression which can potentially compromise the safety of the operation. Separation of the surgeon from the patient and team members is the main contributor for flow disruptions (FDs) in robot-assisted surgery (RAS). FDs have been categorised as communication, coordination, surgeon task considerations, training, equipment/ technology, external factors, instrument changes, and environmental factors. There may be an association between FDs and task error rate. Intervention to counter FDs include training, operating room adjustments, checklists, teamwork, communication improvement, ergonomics, technology, guidelines, workflow optimisation, and team briefing. Future studies should focus on identifying the significant disruptive FDs and the impact of interventions on surgical flow during RAS.

Work-system interventions in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review exploring the gap between challenges and solutions

BACKGROUND

The introduction of a robot into the surgical suite changes the dynamics of the work-system, creating new opportunities for both success and failure. An extensive amount of research has identified a range of barriers to safety and efficiency in Robotic Assisted Surgery (RAS), such as communication breakdowns, coordination failures, equipment issues, and technological malfunctions. However, there exists very few solutions to these barriers. The purpose of this review was to identify the gap between identified RAS work-system barriers and interventions developed to address those barriers.

METHODS

A search from three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline) was conducted for literature discussing system-level interventions for RAS that were published between January 1, 1985 to March 17, 2020. Articles describing interventions for systems-level issues that did not involve technical skills in RAS were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

A total of 30 articles were included in the review. Only seven articles (23.33%) implemented and evaluated interventions, while the remaining 23 articles (76.67%) provided suggested interventions for issues in RAS. Major barriers identified included disruptions, ergonomic issues, safety and efficiency, communication, and non-technical skills. Common solutions involved team training, checklist development, and workspace redesign.

CONCLUSION

The review identified a significant gap between issues and solutions in RAS. While it is important to continue identifying how the complexities of RAS affect operating room (OR) and team dynamics, future work will need to address existing issues with interventions that have been tested and evaluated. In particular, improving RAS-associated non-technical skills, task management, and technology management may lead to improved OR dynamics associated with greater efficiency, reduced costs, and better systems-level outcomes.

Anesthesia Professionals' Perspectives of Teamwork During Robotic-Assisted Surgery

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) presents unique teamwork challenges for perioperative team members, including anesthesia professionals. The purpose of this study was to explore anesthesiologists' and nurse anesthetists' teamwork experiences during RAS using an exploratory qualitative study design involving individual semistructured interviews. Study participants expressed that teamwork during RAS is both positive and challenging, and the start-up phase is the most demanding phase of RAS in terms of teamwork. Anesthesia professionals believe that both technical and nontechnical skills are necessary to provide excellent patient care and maintain patient safety during RAS. Furthermore, they believe that a more concentrated focus on nontechnical skills than is traditional is an essential component of teamwork.

Interventions to improve team effectiveness within health care: a systematic review of the past decade

BACKGROUND

A high variety of team interventions aims to improve team performance outcomes. In 2008, we conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of the scientific studies focused on these interventions. However, over the past decade, the literature on team interventions has rapidly evolved. An updated overview is therefore required, and it will focus on all possible team interventions without restrictions to a type of intervention, setting, or research design.

OBJECTIVES

To review the literature from the past decade on interventions with the goal of improving team effectiveness within healthcare organizations and identify the "evidence base" levels of the research.

METHODS

Seven major databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published between 2008 and July 2018. Of the original search yield of 6025 studies, 297 studies met the inclusion criteria according to three independent authors and were subsequently included for analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Scale was used to assess the level of empirical evidence.

RESULTS

Three types of interventions were distinguished: (1) Training, which is sub-divided into training that is based on predefined principles (i.e. CRM: crew resource management and TeamSTEPPS: Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety), on a specific method (i.e. simulation), or on general team training. (2) Tools covers tools that structure (i.e. SBAR: Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation, (de)briefing checklists, and rounds), facilitate (through communication technology), or trigger (through monitoring and feedback) teamwork. (3) Organizational (re)design is about (re)designing structures to stimulate team processes and team functioning. (4) A programme is a combination of the previous types. The majority of studies evaluated a training focused on the (acute) hospital care setting. Most of the evaluated interventions focused on improving non-technical skills and provided evidence of improvements.

CONCLUSION

Over the last decade, the number of studies on team interventions has increased exponentially. At the same time, research tends to focus on certain interventions, settings, and/or outcomes. Principle-based training (i.e. CRM and TeamSTEPPS) and simulation-based training seem to provide the greatest opportunities for reaching the improvement goals in team functioning.

Integrative Literature Review Examining Factors Affecting Patient Safety With Robotic-Assisted and Laparoscopic Surgeries

PURPOSE

The purpose of this integrative literature review is to examine the evidence on factors affecting patient safety during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries.

DESIGN

Systematic review of papers published between 2011 and 2016 that identified factors affecting safety during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries, in the areas of colorectal, general, urological, and gynecological surgeries.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, and Medline databases were performed. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria outlining factors affecting safety in robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries. All 12 studies selected were quality appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme.

FINDINGS

Using thematic analysis, the outcomes from the 12 studies were categorized into three thematic categories. Intraoperative communication, teamwork, and disruptions are the key factors affecting patient safety during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

This integrative literature review identifies a dearth of evidence examining factors affecting patient safety during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries. It draws attention to the complexities with teamwork, intraoperative communication and disruptions during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries. Although robotic-assisted surgery is generally seen as safe and effective, this review highlights the need for education and training that focuses on non-technical skills development, disruption prevention and alertness in anticipating and minimising risk.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The evidence from this review identifies the different demands and diverse challenges in maintaining safety during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgery. Although specific technical knowledge and skills are essential, this review highlights the importance of developing new ways of thinking with regard to assessment and management of disruptions, developing different teamwork patterns and communication skills, and overcoming challenges introduced during technology advanced surgeries. Nurses in the perioperative setting have an increased responsibility to continue professional development and remain vigilant to factors affecting patient safety. Early identification and management of factors leading to disruptions is imperative in the provision of safe perioperative care.