Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Information needs in operating room teams: what is right, what is wrong, and what is needed?

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Safe surgical care requires effective information transfer between members of the operating room (OR) team. The present study aims to assess directly, systematically, and comprehensively, information needs of all OR team-members.

Methods

Thirty-three OR team-members (16 surgeons/anesthesiologists, 17 nurses) took part in a mixed-method interview. Participants indicated what information they need, their problems accessing it, and potential interventions to improve information transfer. They also rated the importance of different sources of information and the quality (accuracy, availability, timeliness, completeness, and clarity) of the information that they typically receive. Theme extraction and statistical analyses (descriptive and inferential) were used to analyze the data.

Results

The patient emerged as the top source of information. Surgeons and anesthesiologists relied more on information from fellow clinicians, as well as information originating from diagnostic and imaging labs. They were also more critical about the quality of the information than nursing personnel. Anesthesiologists emerged as the most reliable source of information, whereas information coming from surgeons was deemed lacking in quality (even by surgeons themselves). Finally, the more time participants had spent working in ORs, the more negative views they had about the information that they receive—an unexpected finding. Communication skills training, standardized communication protocols, and information technology (IT) systems to function as a central information repository were the top three proposed interventions.

Conclusions

This study comprehensively maps information sources, problems, and solutions expressed by OR end-users. Recent developments in skills training modules and patient safety interventions for the OR (Surgical Safety Checklist) are discussed as potential interventions that will ameliorate communication in ORs, with a view to enhance patient safety and surgical care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mills P, Neily J, Dunn E (2008) Teamwork and communication in surgical teams: implications for patient safety. J Am Coll Surg 206:107–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nagpal K, Vats A, Lamb BW, Ashrafian H, Sevdalis N, Vincent CA, Moorthy K (2010) Information transfer and communication in surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg 252:225–239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Calland J, Guerlain S, Adams R, Tribble CG, Foley E, Chekan EG (2002) A systems approach to surgical safety. Surg Endosc 16:1005–1014

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi A (2004) Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg 239:475–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lingard L, Espin S, Whyte S, Regehr G, Baker GR, Reznick R, Bohnen J, Orser B, Doran D, Grober E (2004) Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Qual Saf Health Care 13:330–334

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lingard L, Reznick R, Espin S, Regehr G, De Vito I (2002) Team communications in the operating room: talk patterns, sites of tensions, and implications for novices. Acad Med 77:232–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sevdalis N, Healey AN, Vincent CA (2007) Distracting communications in the operating theatre. J Eval Clin Pract 13:390–394

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zheng B, Martinec DV, Cassera Ma, Swanstrom LL (2008) A quantitative study of disruption in the operating room during laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Surg Endosc 22:2171–2177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sevdalis N, Forrest D, Undre S, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2007) Annoyances, disruptions and interruptions in surgery. The Disruptions in Surgery Index (DiSI). World J Surg 32:1643–1650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Arora S, Sevdalis N, Nestel D, Tierney T, Woloshynowych M, Kneebone R (2009) Managing intraoperative stress: what do surgeons want from a crisis training program? Am J Surg 197:537–543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Arora S, Sevdalis N, Nestel D, Woloshynowych M, Darzi A, Kneebone R (2010) The impact of stress on surgical performance: a systematic review of the literature. Surgery 147:318–330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Undre S, Sevdalis N, Healey AN, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2006) Teamwork in the operating theatre: cohesion or confusion? J Eval Clin Pract 12:182–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nicholas D, Williams P, Smith A, Longbottom P (2005) The information needs of perioperative staff: a preparatory study for a proposed specialist library for theatres (NeLH). Health Info Libr J 22:35–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Williams RG, Silverman R, Schwind C, Fortune JB, Sutyak J, Horvath KD, Van Eaton EG, Azzie G, Potts JR III, Boehler M, Dunnington G (2007) Surgeon information transfer and communication: factors affecting quality and efficiency of inpatient care. Ann Surg 245:159–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Moss J, Xiao Y (2002) A comparison of communication needs of charge nurses in two operating room suites. Proc AMIA Symp 543–547

  16. Moss J, Xiao Y (2004) Improving operating room coordination: communication pattern assessment. J Nurs Adm 34:93–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sevdalis N, Undre S, Henry J, Sydney E, Koutantji M, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2009) Development, initial reliability and validity testing of an observational tool for assessing technical skills of operating room nurses. Int J Nurs Stud 46:1187–1193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dukes KA (2005) Cronbach’s Alpha. Encyclopedia of biostatistics, 2nd edn. Wiley InterScience. http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/emrw/9780470011812/eob/article/b2a13018/current/html. Last accessed 5 May 2010

  19. Issenberg S, Gordon MS, Gordon DL, Saffor RE, Hart IR (2001) Simulation and new learning technologies. Med Teach 16:16–23

    Google Scholar 

  20. Aggarwal R, Balasundaram I, Darzi A (2008) Training opportunities and the role of virtual reality simulation in acquisition of basic laparoscopic skills. J Surg Res 145:80–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dankelman J, Di Lorenzo N (2005) Surgical training and simulation. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 14:211–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Undre S, Koutantji M, Sevdalis N, Gautama S, Selavpatt N, Williams S, Sains P, McCulloch P, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2007) Multidisciplinary crisis simulations: the way forward for training surgical teams. World J Surg 31:1843–1853

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Manias E, Street E (2000) Legitimation of nurses’ knowledge through policies and protocols in clinical practice. J Adv Nurs 32:1467–1475

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Haynes AB, Wesier TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat A-HS, Dellinger EP, Herbosa T, Joseph S, Kibatala PL, Lapitan MCM, Merry AF, Moorthy K, Reznick RK, Taylor B, Gawande AA (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360:491–499

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lingard L, Regehr G, Orser B, Reznick R, Baker GR, Doran D, Espin S, Bohnen J, Whyte S (2008) Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication. Arch Surg 143:12–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Einav Y, Gopher D, Kara I, Ben-Yosef O, Lawn M, Laufer N, Liebergall M, Donchin Y (2010) Preoperative briefing in the operating room: shared cognition, teamwork, and patient safety. Chest 137:443–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Paull DE, Mazzia LM, Izu BS, Neily J, Mills PD, Bagian JP (2009) Predictors of successful implementation of preoperative briefings and debriefings after medical team training. Am J Surg 198:675–678

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Undre S, Sevdalis N, Healey AN, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2007) Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS): refinement and application in urological surgery. World J Surg 31:1373–1381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Adams S, Pandey V, Darzi A (2005) A human factors analysis of technical and team skills among surgical trainees during procedural simulations in a simulated operating theatre. Ann Surg 242:631–639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Paige JT, Kozmenko V, Yang T, Paragi Gururaja R, Hilton CW, Cohn I Jr, Chauvin SW (2009) High-fidelity, simulation-based, interdisciplinary operating room team training at the point of care. Surgery 145:138–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council of the UK. The Imperial Centre for Patient Safety and Service Quality is funded by the National Institute of Health Research. The authors would like to thank Dr. Sonal Arora for her valuable comments on previous drafts of the manuscript.

Disclosures

Authors Helen Wong, Damien Forrest, Andrew Healey, Hanieh Shirafkan, George Hanna, Charles Vincent, and Nick Sevdalis have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London and Imperial Centre for Patient Safety and Service Quality, London, UK

    Helen W. L. Wong, Damien Forrest, Andrew Healey, Hanieh Shirafkan, Charles A. Vincent & Nick Sevdalis

  2. Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, 5th Floor Wright Fleming Building (Room 507), St Mary’s Hospital Campus, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK

    George B. Hanna & Nick Sevdalis

Authors
  1. Helen W. L. Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Damien Forrest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew Healey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hanieh Shirafkan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. George B. Hanna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Charles A. Vincent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nick Sevdalis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nick Sevdalis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wong, H.W.L., Forrest, D., Healey, A. et al. Information needs in operating room teams: what is right, what is wrong, and what is needed?. Surg Endosc 25, 1913–1920 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1486-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1486-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation