Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR) Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR) Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin; Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
J Surg Res. 2019 Mar;235:395-403. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.09.079. Epub 2018 Nov 15.
Poor communication is implicated in many adverse events in the operating room (OR); however, many hospitals' scheduling practices permit unfamiliar operative teams. The relationship between unfamiliarity, team communication and effectiveness of communication is poorly understood. We sought to evaluate the relationship between familiarity, communication rates, and communication ineffectiveness of health care providers in the OR.
We performed purposive sampling of 10 open operations. For each case, six providers (anesthesiology attending, in-room anesthetist, circulator, scrub, surgery attending, and surgery resident) were queried about the number of mutually shared cases. We identified communication events and created dyad-specific communication rates.
Analysis of 48 h of audio-video content identified 2570 communication events. Operations averaged 58.0 communication events per hour (range, 29.4-76.1). Familiarity was not associated with communication rate (P = 0.69) or communication ineffectiveness (P = 0.21). Cross-disciplinary dyads had lower communication rates than intradisciplinary dyads (P < 0.001). Anesthesiology-nursing, anesthesiology-surgery, and nursing-surgery dyad communication rates were 20.1%, 42.7%, and 57.3% the rate predicted from intradisciplinary dyads, respectively. In addition, cross-disciplinary dyad status was a significant predictor of having at least one ineffective communication event (P = 0.02).
Team members do not compensate for unfamiliarity by increasing their verbal communication, and dyad familiarity is not protective against ineffective communication. Cross-disciplinary communication remains vulnerable in the OR suggesting poor crosstalk across disciplines in the operative setting. Further investigation is needed to explore these relationships and identify effective interventions, ensuring that all team members have the necessary information to optimize their performance.
手术室(OR)中许多不良事件都与沟通不畅有关;然而,许多医院的排班实践允许不熟悉的手术团队。不熟悉、团队沟通和沟通有效性之间的关系尚未得到充分理解。我们试图评估 OR 中医疗保健提供者的熟悉程度、沟通率和沟通无效性之间的关系。
我们对 10 例开放式手术进行了有针对性的抽样。对于每个病例,询问六位参与者(麻醉主治医生、室内麻醉师、巡回护士、洗手护士、手术主治医生和手术住院医师)相互分享的病例数量。我们确定了沟通事件,并创建了特定于二人组的沟通率。
对 48 小时的音频-视频内容进行分析,共确定了 2570 次沟通事件。手术平均每小时发生 58.0 次沟通事件(范围为 29.4-76.1)。熟悉度与沟通率(P=0.69)或沟通无效性(P=0.21)无关。跨学科二人组的沟通率低于同学科二人组(P<0.001)。麻醉护理、麻醉手术和护理手术二人组的沟通率分别为同学科二人组预测值的 20.1%、42.7%和 57.3%。此外,跨学科二人组的状态是至少发生一次无效沟通事件的重要预测因素(P=0.02)。
团队成员不会通过增加口头沟通来弥补不熟悉度,并且二人组的熟悉度并不能防止沟通无效。手术室中的跨学科沟通仍然很脆弱,这表明在手术环境中不同学科之间的交流不畅。需要进一步调查这些关系并确定有效的干预措施,以确保所有团队成员都有必要的信息来优化他们的表现。