Associations of workflow disruptions in the operating room with surgical outcomes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.


Journal

BMJ quality & safety
ISSN: 2044-5423
Titre abrégé: BMJ Qual Saf
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101546984

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2020
Historique:
received: 15 11 2019
revised: 27 04 2020
accepted: 28 04 2020
pubmed: 25 5 2020
medline: 16 9 2021
entrez: 25 5 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Performance in the operating room is an important determinant of surgical safety. Flow disruptions (FDs) represent system-related performance problems that affect the efficiency of the surgical team and have been associated with a risk to patient safety. Despite the growing evidence base on FDs, a systematic synthesis has not yet been published. Our aim was to identify, evaluate and summarise the evidence on relationships between intraoperative FD events and provider, surgical process and patient outcomes. We systematically searched databases MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (last update: September 2019). Two reviewers independently screened the resulting studies at the title/abstract and full text stage in duplicate, and all inconsistencies were resolved through discussion. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using established and validated tools. We summarised effects from included studies through a narrative synthesis, stratified based on predefined surgical outcome categories, including surgical process, provider and patient outcomes. We screened a total of 20 481 studies. 38 studies were found to be eligible. Included studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of methodology, medical specialty and context. Across studies, 20.5% of operating time was attributed to FDs. Various other process, patient and provider outcomes were reported. Most studies reported negative or non-significant associations of FDs with surgical outcomes. Apart from the identified relationship of FDs with procedure duration, the evidence base concerning the impact of FDs on provider, surgical process and patient outcomes is limited and heterogeneous. We further provide recommendations concerning use of methods, relevant outcomes and avenues for future research on associated effects of FDs in surgery.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Performance in the operating room is an important determinant of surgical safety. Flow disruptions (FDs) represent system-related performance problems that affect the efficiency of the surgical team and have been associated with a risk to patient safety. Despite the growing evidence base on FDs, a systematic synthesis has not yet been published.
OBJECTIVE
Our aim was to identify, evaluate and summarise the evidence on relationships between intraoperative FD events and provider, surgical process and patient outcomes.
METHODS
We systematically searched databases MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (last update: September 2019). Two reviewers independently screened the resulting studies at the title/abstract and full text stage in duplicate, and all inconsistencies were resolved through discussion. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using established and validated tools. We summarised effects from included studies through a narrative synthesis, stratified based on predefined surgical outcome categories, including surgical process, provider and patient outcomes.
RESULTS
We screened a total of 20 481 studies. 38 studies were found to be eligible. Included studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of methodology, medical specialty and context. Across studies, 20.5% of operating time was attributed to FDs. Various other process, patient and provider outcomes were reported. Most studies reported negative or non-significant associations of FDs with surgical outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Apart from the identified relationship of FDs with procedure duration, the evidence base concerning the impact of FDs on provider, surgical process and patient outcomes is limited and heterogeneous. We further provide recommendations concerning use of methods, relevant outcomes and avenues for future research on associated effects of FDs in surgery.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32447319
pii: bmjqs-2019-010639
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-010639
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

1033-1045

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Auteurs

Amelie Koch (A)

Institute and Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany amelie.koch@med.uni-muenchen.de.

Jacob Burns (J)

Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology - IBE, Munich, Germany.
Pettenkofer School of Public Health, Munich, Germany.

Ken Catchpole (K)

Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC), Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Matthias Weigl (M)

Institute and Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany.
Division of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH