Hallet, Julie

Abstract Background Poor operating room (OR) ergonomics poses risk of injury to OR staff, worsening patient outcomes and threatening workforce wellness and sustainability. How OR staff navigate ergonomic barriers in the interdisciplinary team environment was examined in this qualitative study. Methods Semi-structured, open-ended interviews of surgeons, anaesthesiologists, and OR nurses were conducted at a single institution using a sociomaterial approach with interview-to-the-double. Transcripts were coded by two independent researchers. Themes in the data were outlined using the System Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 framework. Results Five major themes were identified. First, physical environment issues creating cognitive and physical frictions, such as tripping hazards and poor room layouts. Second, influence of social positionality, with hierarchy by role and experience and social dynamics leading to a differential capacity to adjust. Third, team collaboration, with lack of interdisciplinary work and communication and high staff turnover. Fourth, burden of self-initiated workarounds, outlining conflicts between system/organizational issues and individual solutions. Fifth, institutional support, with lack of leadership engagement. Participants suggested solutions including accommodations to foster a collaborative approach to managing discomfort in the OR and new team communication tools. Conclusion Ergonomic barriers were described within the work system of the SEIPS 2.0 framework. Social positionality and differential levels of agency, as well as lack of team collaboration and misperceptions of others’ roles, were central to ergonomic challenges. Conflicts between problems lying with the system/organization and solutions being left to individuals were also central to challenges to optimal OR ergonomics.

Objective: To examine perceived operating room (OR) ergonomics facilitators and barriers, with a focus on the interdisciplinary team. Background: Poor ergonomics causes musculoskeletal injuries affecting all OR staff with repercussions on patient care, outcomes, and sustainability. Lack of ergonomic awareness and education are risk factors. Methods: We conducted a self-administered web-based survey of OR nurses, surgeons, and anesthesiologists at a single center (n = 238). We developed a questionnaire through item generation and reduction, followed by reliability and validity testing. Results: Response rate was 53.8%. Respondents perceived that on average 80% of nurses, 70% of surgeons, and 40% of anesthesiologists experienced musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries, with no difference in professional groups’ perceptions. Guideline ergonomics interventions were rarely used (<25%) except for specialized clothing (33%), equipment repositioning (59%), and seating (37%), though perceived as beneficial by 80% to 90%. Reported barriers to optimal ergonomics were organizational/structural (lack of time, space, equipment, funding), whereas solutions were individual. Fear of unfavorable perceptions from others was a concern for 62%. Teams discussing, prioritizing, monitoring, or helping with ergonomics was indicated by <50%. Individual ergonomic adaptations were perceived as convenience by other staff. Conclusions: While structural/organizational issues are reported as barriers to ergonomics, solutions appear as individual responsibilities. Team dynamics did not prioritize nor support ergonomics. Education tools leveraging the interdisciplinary team are warranted. This work will be supplemented by interviews and live observations to build tailored educational tools for OR teams.

Abstract Neuroendocrine neoplasms are a diverse group of neoplasms that can occur in various areas throughout the body. Well‐differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) most often arise in the gastrointestinal tract, termed gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP‐NETs). Although GEP‐NETs are still uncommon, their incidence and prevalence have been steadily increasing over the past decades. The primary treatment for GEP‐NETs is surgery, which offers the best chance for a cure. However, because GEP‐NETs are often slow‐growing and do not cause symptoms until they have spread widely, curative surgery is not always an option. Significant advances have been made in systemic and locoregional treatment options in recent years, including peptide‐receptor radionuclide therapy with α and β emitters, somatostatin analogs, chemotherapy, and targeted molecular therapies.