Patient Perceptions of Audio and Video Recording in the Operating Room.
Journal
Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 12 2022
01 12 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
26
2
2021
medline:
11
11
2022
entrez:
25
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The goal of this study was to determine surgical patients' perceptions of hypothetical continuous audio-video OR recording (ORR). Continuous audio-video recording of the operating room (OR), akin to the aviation industry's black box, has been proposed as a means to enhance training, supplement the medical record, and allow large-scale analysis of surgical performance and safety. These recordings would include patients' bodies; yet, understanding of patient perceptions regarding such technology is limited. Semi-structured interviews were conducted during elective surgery preoperative appointments during a 2-week period in August 2018 at a quaternary care center. Deidentified transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Forty-nine subjects were interviewed. Subjects recognized the potential for recording to improve surgical quality, safety and training. Subjects also desired access to an objective record of their own surgery, for the purposes of future care, medical-legal evidence, and to satisfy their own curiosity and understanding. Subjects had mixed perceptions regarding OR decorum and thus, differing views on the potential effect of ORR on OR behavior; some imagined that ORR would discourage bad behavior and others worried that it would cause unnecessary anxiety to the surgical team. Patients have a diverse set of views about the potential benefits, risks, and uses for OR data and consider themselves to be important stakeholders. Our study identifies pathways and potential challenges to implementation of continuous audio/video recording in ORs.
Sections du résumé
OBJECTIVE
The goal of this study was to determine surgical patients' perceptions of hypothetical continuous audio-video OR recording (ORR).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Continuous audio-video recording of the operating room (OR), akin to the aviation industry's black box, has been proposed as a means to enhance training, supplement the medical record, and allow large-scale analysis of surgical performance and safety. These recordings would include patients' bodies; yet, understanding of patient perceptions regarding such technology is limited.
METHODS
Semi-structured interviews were conducted during elective surgery preoperative appointments during a 2-week period in August 2018 at a quaternary care center. Deidentified transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS
Forty-nine subjects were interviewed. Subjects recognized the potential for recording to improve surgical quality, safety and training. Subjects also desired access to an objective record of their own surgery, for the purposes of future care, medical-legal evidence, and to satisfy their own curiosity and understanding. Subjects had mixed perceptions regarding OR decorum and thus, differing views on the potential effect of ORR on OR behavior; some imagined that ORR would discourage bad behavior and others worried that it would cause unnecessary anxiety to the surgical team.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients have a diverse set of views about the potential benefits, risks, and uses for OR data and consider themselves to be important stakeholders. Our study identifies pathways and potential challenges to implementation of continuous audio/video recording in ORs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33630449
pii: 00000658-202212000-00074
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004759
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1057-e1063Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
Références
Guerlain S, Adams RB, Turrentine FB, et al. Assessing team performance in the operating room: development and use of a “black-box” recorder and other tools for the intraoperative environment. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;1200:29–37.
Langerman A, Grantcharov TP. Are we ready for our close-up?: why and how we must embrace video in the OR. Ann Surg. 2017;266:934–936.
Jung JJ, Jüni P, Lebovic G, et al. First-year analysis of the operating room black box study. Ann Surg. 2020;271:122–127.
van Dalen ASHM, Legemaate J, Schlack WS, et al. Legal perspectives on black box recording devices in the operating environment. Br J Surg. 2019;106:1433–1441.
Jue J, Shah NA, Mackey TK. An interdisciplinary review of surgical data recording technology features and legal considerations. Surg Innov. 2019;27:220–228.
Turnbull AMJ, Emsley ES. Video recording of ophthalmic–surgery-ethical and legal considerations. Surv Ophthalmol. 2014;59:553–558.
Prigoff JG, Sherwin M, Divino CM. Ethical recommendations for video recording in the operating room. Ann Surg. 2016;264:34–35.
Saun TJ, Zuo KJ, Grantcharov TP. Video technologies for recording open surgery: a systematic review. Surg Innov. 2019;26:599–612.
Shah NA, Jue J, Mackey TK. Surgical data recording technology. Ann Surg. 2020;271:431–433.
Dwamena F, Holmes-Rovner M, Gaulden CM, et al. Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;12:CD003267.
de Bekker-Grob EW, Berlin C, Levitan B, et al. Giving patients’ preferences a voice in medical treatment life cycle: the PREFER public-private project. Patient Springer International Publishing. 2017;10:263–266.
MacQueen KM, McLellan E, Kay K, et al. Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. CAM J [Internet] 2nd ed. 1998;10:31–36.
Green JL, Suresh V, Bittar P, et al. The utilization of video technology in surgical education: a systematic review. J Surg Res. 2019;235:171–180.
Augestad KM, Butt K, Ignjatovic D, et al. Video-based coaching in surgical education: a systematic reviewand meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2020;34:521–535.
Papadopoulos N, Polyzos D, Gambadauro P, et al. Do patients want to see recordings of their surgery? Eur J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;138:89–92.
Ballon-Landa E, Clavijo P, Gross M, et al. A novel video-based patient education program to reduce penile prosthetic surgery cancellations. Am J Mens Health. 2019;13:1557988319893568.
McQueen S, McKinnon V, VanderBeek L, et al. Video-based assessment in surgical education: a scoping review. J Surg Educ. 2019;76:1645–1654.
Prebay ZJ, Peabody JO, Miller DC, et al. Video review for measuring and improving skill in urological surgery. Nat Rev Urol. 2019;16:261–267.
Bergström H, Larsson L-G, Stenberg E. Audio-video recording during lapa-roscopic surgery reduces irrelevant conversation between surgeons: a cohort study. BMC Surg. 2018;18:92.
Bui AH, Guerrier S, Feldman DL, et al. Is video observation as effective as live observation in improving teamwork in the operating room? Surgery. 2018;163:1191–1196.
Kitaguchi D, Takeshita N, Matsuzaki H, et al. Real-time automatic surgical phase recognition in laparoscopic sigmoidectomy using the convolutional neural network-based deep learning approach. Surg Endosc;. 2019;37:1114–1118.
Mascagni P, Fiorillo C, Urade T, et al. Formalizing video documentation of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a step towards artificial intelligence assistance to improve surgical safety. Surg Endosc. 2019;32:2175–2176.
Levin D, Tan S. Black box audio/video recording in the operating room: time for anesthesiologists to get with the picture. Can J Anaesth. 2015;62:937–938.
Cannesson M, Hofer I, Rinehart J, et al. Machine learning of physiological waveforms and electronic health record data to predict, diagnose and treat haemodynamic instability in surgical patients: protocol for a retrospective study. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e031988.
Gerke S, Yeung S, Cohen IG. Ethical and legal aspects of ambient intelligence in hospitals. JAMA. 2020;323:601–602.
Serrone RO, Weinberg JA, Goslar PW, et al. Grey’s anatomy effect: television portrayal of patients with trauma may cultivate unrealistic patient and family expectations after injury. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2018;3:e000137–e000144.
Etherington N, Usama A, Patey AM, et al. Exploring stakeholder perceptions around implementation of the Operating Room Black Box for patient safety research: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework. BMJ Open Qual. 2019;8:e000686.
The 2013-2014 Massachusetts General Court. An Act relative to video and audio patient protection system. 2013; 1–2. https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/H2105 . Accessed October 5, 2021.
The State of Wisconsin 2015-2016 Legislature. 2015 Assembly Bill 255. 2015; 1–13. https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/H2105 . Accessed October 5, 2021.
Catchpole K, Mishra A, Handa A, et al. Teamwork and error in the operating room: analysis of skills and roles. Ann Surg. 2008;247:699–706.
Hu Y-Y, Parker SH, Lipsitz SR, et al. Surgeons’ leadership styles and team behavior in the operating room. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222:41–51.
Namey EE, Trotter R. Qualitative research methods. In: Guest G, Namey EE, eds. Public Health Research Methods. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications; 2015:443–482.
Boeije H. A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant. 2002;36:391–409.
Corbin JM, Strauss AL. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory . 3rd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications; 2008.
Guest G, Namey E, Chen M. A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0232076.
Menikoff J, Kaneshiro J, Pritchard I. The common rule. Updated N Engl J Med. 2017;376:613–615.
Jones CW, Roberts BW, Platts-Mills TF. Patient perspectives on sharing deidentified trial data. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165:748–749.
Department of Health and Human Services. Standards for privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information. 65 Fed Reg. 82,462. 2000 Dec 28.