Hallbeck, M. Susan

With various minimally invasive approaches in the field of surgery and new techniques entering rapidly, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of these different practices. Information about the impact on both patient and provider can be gained through research investigations. Since the workload placed on the surgeon may influence patient outcomes, this study measured levels of stress and fatigue for the surgeon participating in an NIH randomized control trial of single incision versus 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Through the administration of the SURG-TLX for 22 Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies and 24 4-port cholecystectomies, physical workload was the only measure statistically different between 4-port and SILC (P=0.028). There was a significant difference in the duration (P=0.029) based on the procedure that was completed. Mental stress was highly correlated to many of the variables in the Surg-TLX and duration, degree of difficulty, and complexity were all highly correlated. This research shows how the SILC procedure can cause more stress on the surgeon. When the situation is combined with longer surgeries, higher complexity, and a higher degree of difficulty, the patient outcomes may be at risk.

This discussion panel aims to identify ergonomic concerns, solutions and research needs, physical stresses, and outcomes related to clinical and surgical procedures. This session will begin with formal presentations to demonstrate current ergonomic concerns and research initiatives associated with clinical and surgical procedures to frame the panel discussion for the second part of the session. Discussion of different procedures will help to identify solutions and research needs that relate to a broad range of ergonomic problems. Questions will be collected from the attendees and speakers and organized so as to guide the panel discussion and to engage all of the speakers in the discussion to achieve the symposium aims.

The adoptions of briefing and debriefing protocols have evolved from the Joint Commission’s initiative to improve communication and safety in the operating room. Briefing normally occurs prior to incision and is used to discuss and confirm critical information, while debriefing occurs during or after surgery. Debriefing provides a unique opportunity for individuals and teams to immediately reflect on their performance, allowing them to more easily identify errors and develop plans to improve their next performance. Studies have shown that using briefings and debriefings improve communication and teamwork. However, there is still much to learn about the value of both for surgical teams. This paper presents a robust methodology for examining and measuring the impacts of surgical team briefings and debriefings on teamwork. The methodology includes (1) audio/video recording the surgical care process, (2) prospective observations using a validated electronic data collection tool, (3) pre- and post-surgery surveys, and (4) individual surgical team member interviews. The current paper describes the methodology to obtain a robust and comprehensive data set for analyzing the impacts of briefing and debriefing on teamwork; the results of the surgeries recorded using this methodology will be presented in subsequent papers.

Briefings are suggested to be an important mechanism for establishing and maintaining cohesive teams. However, there is still much to learn about briefings and how best to design and implement them for surgical teams in the operating room. Currently, there are no formally recognized protocols or methodologies for conducting surgical team briefings. This research reports preliminary findings from an effort to develop a model of team briefings for gynecological surgical teams. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using techniques derived from Applied Cognitive Task Analysis (Millitello & Hutton, 1998) with thirteen surgical team members spanning six different roles including surgeon, surgical resident, registered nurse, certified surgical assistant, certified scrub technician, and anesthesia. Findings reveal that informational needs are consistent across the team but also vary by individual role, illustrating the importance of addressing all stakeholders in potential interventions. Implications for the development of a team briefing model are discussed.

Surgical team members are typically defined by professional roles. In many surgical teams, membership changes as staffing decisions are subject to considerations other than keeping surgical teams consistent. These considerations may include staffing patterns on the day of surgery and at the time of a surgical case. Teamwork skill training and safety culture have been emphasized, although much is known about the contribution to team performance from team consistency. We review the literature on cognitive and psychosocial benefits of consistent surgical teams. Although empirical evidence base for consistent surgical teams is lacking, we believe that the theoretical justifications may lay the groundwork for future research on the impact of deliberate staffing decisions by organizations, to complement the current emphasis on individual teamwork knowledge, skills and attitude. We also outline some of barriers based on our experience in our respective healthcare organizations.

Adverse events because of medical errors are a leading cause of death in the United States (US) exceeding the mortality rates of motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, and AIDS. Improvements can and should be made to reduce the rates of preventable surgical errors because they account for nearly half of all adverse events within hospitals. Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has proven patient benefits such as reduced postoperative pain and hospital stay, its operative environment imposes substantial physical and cognitive strain on the surgeon increasing the risk of error. To mitigate errors and protect patients, a multidisciplinary approach is needed to improve MIS. Clinical human factors, and biomedical engineering principles and methodologies can be used to develop and assess laparoscopic surgery instrumentation, practices, and procedures. First, the foundational understanding and the imperative to transform health care into a high-quality and safe system is discussed. Next, a generalized perspective is presented on the impact of the design and redesign of surgical technologies and processes on human performance. Finally, the future of this field and the research needed to further improve the quality and safety of MIS is discussed.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) is a new minimally invasive surgical technique that presents physical and mental challenges to surgeons. Currently, LESS procedures are commonly performed using surgical instruments designed for traditional multi-incision laparoscopic surgery. A pilot study was conducted to determine which laparoscopic instruments were the most efficient for LESS procedures. In a LESS surgical trainer, 24 novice users completed a simple surgical task using standard (non-articulating) straight laparoscopic graspers and two different articulating instruments. Task performance was scored based on completion time and the number of errors. Analyses showed that the use of the simpler straight instruments produced significantly faster times (p = 0.004 and p = 0.014) and higher task scores (p = 0.005 and p = 0.021) than the articulating instruments. These results suggest that standard laparoscopic hand instruments enable better novice performance for a basic LESS task.

This session will focus on lessons learned when developing solutions for real world problems in healthcare. Human factors (HF) practitioners bring unique knowledge, methods, and perspectives to work with clinicians to address numerous defects in the worksystem but require problem-solving skills that focus on solutions. The HF contribution may be in the area of process improvement (e.g., prevention of patient falls), systems design (e.g., designing crashcart), or identification of design flaws so robust intervention may be deployed (e.g., glucose meters). Six human factors practitioners who work within healthcare systems will present real world challenges which were discovered by HF methods, or which have heavy HF implications, but where direct HF influence on design lead to the ultimate effective solution. The session will be designed to lead to a discussion about how HF methods were adapted to individual problems at hand and to focus on developing solutions.

The Institute of Medicine lists investigations of the comparative effectiveness for minimally invasive surgical procedures as a research priority. As new minimally invasive procedures are developed, comparisons of the resulting workload contribute valuable information about the impact of the new procedures. Recent reports suggest that surgeon workload can influence patient outcomes. Measurements of stress and fatigue for the surgical team participating in a randomized NIH supported trial of single incision versus traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy were obtained. These stress measures showed that the SURG-TLX was sensitive to the difficulty of the surgery. The SURG-TLX and a surgical difficulty score was obtained from the surgical team for 16 laparoscopic surgeries by surgical approach (8 SILC and 8 4-port) showed that for this small sample size, there were no statistically significant differences in length of surgery, degree of difficulty, nor patient considerations such as post-operative pain scores. In addition, no statistically significant differences in the individual Surg-TLX subscale scores or Surg-TLX total for the surgical team overall or for the surgeon alone by surgical platform. This is likely due to the small sample size reducing the power of the tests.