» Articles » PMID: 28646936

Surgical Flow Disruptions During Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Overview
Journal Can J Urol
Specialty Urology
Date 2017 Jun 26
PMID 28646936
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: We sought to apply the principles of human factors research to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy to understand where training and integration challenges lead to suboptimal and inefficient care.

Materials And Methods: Thirty-four robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissections over a 20 week period were observed for flow disruptions (FD) - deviations from optimal care that can compromise safety or efficiency. Other variables - physician experience, trainee involvement, robot model (S versus Si), age, body mass index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status - were used to stratify the data and understand the effect of context. Effects were studied across four operative phases - entry to insufflations, robot docking, surgical intervention, and undocking. FDs were classified into one of nine categories.

Results: An average of 9.2 (SD = 3.7) FD/hr were recorded, with the highest rates during robot docking (14.7 [SD = 4.3] FDs/hr). The three most common flow disruptions were disruptions of communication, coordination, and equipment. Physicians with more robotic experience were faster during docking (p < 0.003). Training cases had a greater FD rate (8.5 versus 10.6, p < 0.001), as did the Si model robot (8.2 versus 9.8, p = 0.002). Patient BMI and ASA classification yielded no difference in operative duration, but had phase-specific differences in FD.

Conclusions: Our data reflects the demands placed on the OR team by the patient, equipment, environment and context of a robotic surgical intervention, and suggests opportunities to enhance safety, quality, efficiency, and learning in robotic surgery.

Citing Articles

Identifying Workflow Disruptions in Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery: Elucidating Challenges Experienced by Surgical Teams.

Zamudio J, Kanji F, Lusk C, Shouhed D, Sanchez B, Catchpole K Obes Surg. 2023; 33(7):2083-2089.

PMID: 37147465 PMC: 10162850. DOI: 10.1007/s11695-023-06620-4.


Factors affecting workflow in robot-assisted surgery: a scoping review.

Poulsen J, Bruun B, Oestergaard D, Spanager L Surg Endosc. 2022; 36(12):8713-8725.

PMID: 35739430 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09373-w.


'Rise of the Machines': Human Factors and training for robotic-assisted surgery.

Kerray F, Yule S BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol. 2022; 3(1):e000100.

PMID: 35051258 PMC: 8647617. DOI: 10.1136/bmjsit-2021-000100.


Using flow disruptions to understand healthcare system safety: A systematic review of observational studies.

Cohen T, Wiegmann D, Kanji F, Alfred M, Anger J, Catchpole K Appl Ergon. 2021; 98:103559.

PMID: 34488190 PMC: 11194701. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103559.


Is non-stop always better? Examining assumptions behind the concept of flow disruptions in studies of robot-assisted surgery.

Bruun B, Poulsen J, Mohl P, Spanager L J Robot Surg. 2021; 16(3):731-733.

PMID: 34283335 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01275-8.


References
1.
Catchpole K, Giddings A, Wilkinson M, Hirst G, Dale T, de Leval M . Improving patient safety by identifying latent failures in successful operations. Surgery. 2007; 142(1):102-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.01.033. View

2.
Catchpole K, Ley E, Wiegmann D, Blaha J, Shouhed D, Gangi A . A human factors subsystems approach to trauma care. JAMA Surg. 2014; 149(9):962-8. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.1208. View

3.
Herrell S, Smith Jr J . Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve?. Urology. 2005; 66(5 Suppl):105-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.084. View

4.
Birch E, Van Bruwaene S, Everaerts W, Schubach K, Bush M, Krishnasamy M . Developing and evaluating Robocare; an innovative, nurse-led robotic prostatectomy care pathway. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2016; 21:120-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2016.02.002. View

5.
ElBardissi A, Wiegmann D, Henrickson S, Wadhera R, Sundt 3rd T . Identifying methods to improve heart surgery: an operative approach and strategy for implementation on an organizational level. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008; 34(5):1027-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2008.07.007. View