» Articles » PMID: 37336845

Associations of Flow Disruptions with Patient, Staff, and Process Outcomes: a Prospective Observational Study of Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomies

Overview
Journal Surg Endosc
Publisher Springer
Date 2023 Jun 19
PMID 37336845
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Technological advancements in the operating room (OR) have sparked new challenges for surgical workflow, OR professionals, and patient safety. Disruptive events are frequent across all surgical specialties, but little is known about their effects on patient outcomes and the influence of systemic factors. The aim was to explore the associations of intraoperative flow disruptions (FDs) with patient outcomes, staff workload, and surgery duration.

Methods: Prospective, single-center, and multi-source study comprising direct and standardized OR observations of urologic surgical procedures, clinical patient outcomes, and staff- and patient-reported outcome data (PROMs; 3-month follow-up). All data were recorded between 01/2020 and 10/2021. FDs were assessed using standardized procedure observations. Linear and logistic regression analyses including multiple system factors were used to explore the effects of FDs on surgical outcomes.

Results: 61 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy procedures were captured (with 61 patients and 243 staff reports). High rates of FDs were observed; however, our analyses did not show significant relationships with patient complication rates. Equipment- and patient-related FDs were associated with increased staff workload. No association was found between higher rates of FDs and procedure duration.

Conclusions: FDs were not related to inferior patient outcomes. Our findings may inform future OR investigations that scrutinize the complex interplay of human, team, process, and technological components that mitigate the effects of FDs during surgery.

Citing Articles

Noise in the operating room coincides with surgical difficulty.

Peisl S, Sanchez-Taltavull D, Guillen-Ramirez H, Tschan F, Semmer N, Hubner M BJS Open. 2024; 8(5).

PMID: 39413049 PMC: 11482277. DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae098.


Intraoperative workload of the surgeon in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review.

Yilmaz M, Karaaslan M, Sirin M, Polat M, Aybal H, Toprak T J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):289.

PMID: 39039389 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02049-8.

References
1.
Wilson M, Poolton J, Malhotra N, Ngo K, Bright E, Masters R . Development and validation of a surgical workload measure: the surgery task load index (SURG-TLX). World J Surg. 2011; 35(9):1961-9. PMC: 3152702. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-011-1141-4. View

2.
Schraagen J, Schouten T, Smit M, Haas F, Beek D, van de Ven J . A prospective study of paediatric cardiac surgical microsystems: assessing the relationships between non-routine events, teamwork and patient outcomes. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011; 20(7):599-603. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs.2010.048983. View

3.
de Leval M, Carthey J, Wright D, Farewell V, REASON J . Human factors and cardiac surgery: a multicenter study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000; 119(4 Pt 1):661-72. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5223(00)70006-7. View

4.
Rivera-Rodriguez A, Karsh B . Interruptions and distractions in healthcare: review and reappraisal. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010; 19(4):304-12. PMC: 3007093. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2009.033282. View

5.
Fayers P, Bottomley A . Quality of life research within the EORTC-the EORTC QLQ-C30. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2002; 38 Suppl 4:S125-33. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-8049(01)00448-8. View