Nontechnical skills in pediatric surgery: Factors influencing operative performance

A debriefing tool to acquire non-technical skills in trauma courses

Objective

The study reports the use of a nominal group technique (NGT) to evaluate the PEARLS Healthcare debriefing tool as a tool to foster non-technical skills in trauma simulation courses. Additionally, it introduces a debriefing card to be used in trauma courses.

Design

A nominal group technique was used to evaluate the main strategies for PEARLS. The experts had the opportunity to share their opinions in an online survey and online meeting.

Results

Seven participants participated in the nominal group. Based on the online survey results, the self-assessment debriefing strategy (from PEARLS) was rated 4.83/5 in relevance, the focused facilitation 5/5, and the provision of information 4.5/5. Participants felt that PEARLS was appropriate and useful for fostering non-technical skills: all the debriefing strategies contained in PEARLS were felt to be valid and worth using; and cue cards for the instructors were suggested to assist them in conducting structured formal debriefings. A specific debriefing tool for trauma scenarios was designed based on these suggestions, which is presented in this article.

Conclusion

A nominal group of experts in education, simulation, and trauma support PEARLS strategies for non-technical skills training in trauma courses.

•

Surgical programs overlook non-technical skills, possibly due to uncertainty regarding their instruction.

•

A structured debriefing tool can foster non-technical skills in trauma education.

•

This study introduces a debriefing card for trauma scenarios generated by a group of experts.

Non-Technical Skill Assessment and Mental Load Evaluation in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery

BACKGROUND: Sensor technologies and data collection practices are changing and improving quality metrics across various domains. Surgical skill assessment in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery (RAMIS) is essential for training and quality assurance. The mental workload on the surgeon (such as time criticality, task complexity, distractions) and non-technical surgical skills (including situational awareness, decision making, stress resilience, communication, leadership) may directly influence the clinical outcome of the surgery. METHODS: A literature search in PubMed, Scopus and PsycNet databases was conducted for relevant scientific publications. The standard PRISMA method was followed to filter the search results, including non-technical skill assessment and mental/cognitive load and workload estimation in RAMIS. Publications related to traditional manual Minimally Invasive Surgery were excluded, and also the usability studies on the surgical tools were not assessed. RESULTS: 50 relevant publications were identified for non-technical skill assessment and mental load and workload estimation in the domain of RAMIS. The identified assessment techniques ranged from self-rating questionnaires and expert ratings to autonomous techniques, citing their most important benefits and disadvantages. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the systematic research, only a limited number of articles was found, indicating that non-technical skill and mental load assessment in RAMIS is not a well-studied area. Workload assessment and soft skill measurement do not constitute part of the regular clinical training and practice yet. Meanwhile, the importance of the research domain is clear based on the publicly available surgical error statistics. Questionnaires and expert-rating techniques are widely employed in traditional surgical skill assessment; nevertheless, recent technological development in sensors and Internet of Things-type devices show that skill assessment approaches in RAMIS can be much more profound employing automated solutions. Measurements and especially big data type analysis may introduce more objectivity and transparency to this critical domain as well. SIGNIFICANCE: Non-technical skill assessment and mental load evaluation in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery is not a well-studied area yet; while the importance of this domain from the clinical outcome's point of view is clearly indicated by the available surgical error statistics.

How effective is teamwork really? The relationship between teamwork and performance in healthcare teams: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the relationship between teamwork and clinical performance and potential moderating variables of this relationship.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCE

PubMed was searched in June 2018 without a limit on the date of publication. Additional literature was selected through a manual backward search of relevant reviews, manual backward and forward search of studies included in the meta-analysis and contacting of selected authors via email.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies were included if they reported a relationship between a teamwork process (eg, coordination, non-technical skills) and a performance measure (eg, checklist based expert rating, errors) in an acute care setting.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Moderator variables (ie, professional composition, team familiarity, average team size, task type, patient realism and type of performance measure) were coded and random-effect models were estimated. Two investigators independently extracted information on study characteristics in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

The review identified 2002 articles of which 31 were included in the meta-analysis comprising 1390 teams. The sample-sized weighted mean correlation was r=0.28 (corresponding to an OR of 2.8), indicating that teamwork is positively related to performance. The test of moderators was not significant, suggesting that the examined factors did not influence the average effect of teamwork on performance.

CONCLUSION

Teamwork has a medium-sized effect on performance. The analysis of moderators illustrated that teamwork relates to performance regardless of characteristics of the team or task. Therefore, healthcare organisations should recognise the value of teamwork and emphasise approaches that maintain and improve teamwork for the benefit of their patients.

Reducing surgical mortality in Scotland by use of the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist

Background

The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist has been implemented widely since its launch in 2008. It was introduced in Scotland as part of the Scottish Patient Safety Programme (SPSP) between 2008 and 2010, and is now integral to surgical practice. Its influence on outcomes, when analysed at a population level, remains unclear.

Methods

This was a population cohort study. All admissions to any acute hospital in Scotland between 2000 and 2014 were included. Standardized differences were used to estimate the balance of demographics over time, after which interrupted time-series (segmented regression) analyses were performed. Data were obtained from the Information Services Division, Scotland.

Results

There were 12 667 926 hospital admissions, of which 6 839 736 had a surgical procedure. Amongst the surgical cohort, the inpatient mortality rate in 2000 was 0·76 (95 per cent c.i. 0·68 to 0·84) per cent, and in 2014 it was 0·46 (0·42 to 0·50) per cent. The checklist was associated with a 36·6 (95 per cent c.i. –55·2 to –17·9) per cent relative reduction in mortality (P < 0·001). Mortality rates before implementation were decreasing by 0·003 (95 per cent c.i. –0·017 to +0·012) per cent per year; annual decreases of 0·069 (–0·092 to –0·046) per cent were seen during, and 0·019 (–0·038 to +0·001) per cent after, implementation. No such improvement trends were seen in the non-surgical cohort over this time frame.

Conclusion

Since the implementation of the checklist, as part of an overall national safety strategy, there has been a reduction in perioperative mortality.