Team performance in the operating theatre

Imperial Users onl

Adaptive strategies used by surgical teams under pressure: an interview study among senior healthcare professionals in four major hospitals in the United Kingdom

Background Healthcare systems are operating under substantial pressures, and often simply cannot provide the standard of care they aspire to within the available resources. Organisations, managers, and individual clinicians make constant adaptations in response to these pressures, which are typically improvised, highly variable and not coordinated across clinical teams. The purpose of this study was to identify and describe the types of everyday pressures experienced by surgical teams and the adaptive strategies they use to respond to these pressures. Methods We conducted interviews with 20 senior multidisciplinary healthcare professionals from surgical teams in four major hospitals in the United Kingdom. The interviews explored the types of everyday pressures staff were experiencing, the strategies they use to adapt, and how these strategies might be taught to others. Results The primary pressures described by senior clinicians in surgery were increased numbers and complexity of patients alongside shortages in staff, theatre space and post-surgical beds. These pressures led to more difficult working conditions (e.g. high workloads) and problems with system functioning such as patient flow and cancellation of lists. Strategies for responding to these pressures were categorised into increasing or flexing resources, controlling and prioritising patient demand and strategies for managing the workload (scheduling for efficiency, communication and coordination, leadership, and teamwork strategies). Conclusions Teams are deploying a range of strategies and making adaptations to the way care is delivered. These findings could be used as the basis for training programmes for surgical teams to develop coordinated strategies for adapting under pressure and to assess the impact of different combinations of strategies on patient safety and surgical outcomes

Adaptive strategies used by surgical teams under pressure:an interview study among senior healthcare professionals in four major hospitals in the United Kingdom

BackgroundHealthcare systems are operating under substantial pressures, and often simply cannot provide the standard of care they aspire to within the available resources. Organisations, managers, and individual clinicians make constant adaptations in response to these pressures, which are typically improvised, highly variable and not coordinated across clinical teams. The purpose of this study was to identify and describe the types of everyday pressures experienced by surgical teams and the adaptive strategies they use to respond to these pressures.MethodsWe conducted interviews with 20 senior multidisciplinary healthcare professionals from surgical teams in four major hospitals in the United Kingdom. The interviews explored the types of everyday pressures staff were experiencing, the strategies they use to adapt, and how these strategies might be taught to others.ResultsThe primary pressures described by senior clinicians in surgery were increased numbers and complexity of patients alongside shortages in staff, theatre space and post-surgical beds. These pressures led to more difficult working conditions (e.g. high workloads) and problems with system functioning such as patient flow and cancellation of lists. Strategies for responding to these pressures were categorised into increasing or flexing resources, controlling and prioritising patient demand and strategies for managing the workload (scheduling for efficiency, communication and coordination, leadership, and teamwork strategies).ConclusionsTeams are deploying a range of strategies and making adaptations to the way care is delivered. These findings could be used as the basis for training programmes for surgical teams to develop coordinated strategies for adapting under pressure and to assess the impact of different combinations of strategies on patient safety and surgical outcomes

Practical recommendations of the EAU-ESPU guidelines committee for monosymptomatic enuresis-Bedwetting

Background and Aims The objective of this update of the EAU-ESPU guidelines recommendations for nocturnal enuresis was to review the recent published literature of studies, reviews, guidelines regarding the etiology, diagnosis and treatment options of nocturnal enuresis and transform the information into a practical recommendation strategy for the general practitioner, pediatrician, pediatric urologist and urologist. Material and Methods Since 2012 a monthly literature search using Scopus (R) was performed and the relevant literature was reviewed and prospectively registered on the European Urology bedwetting enuresis resource center (). In addition, guideline papers and statements of the European Society for Paediatric Urology (ESPU), the European Association of Urology (EAU), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the International Children Continence Society (ICCS) were used to update the knowledge and evidence resulting in this practical recommendation strategy. Recommendations have been discussed and agreed within the working group of the EAU-ESPU guidelines committee members. Results The recommendations focus to place the child and his family in a control position. Pragmatic analysis is made of the bedwetting problem by collecting voiding and drinking habits during the day, measuring nighttime urine production and identification of possible risk factors such as high-volume evening drinking, nighttime overactive bladder, behavioral or psychological problems or sleep disordered breathing. A questionnaire will help to identify those risk factors. Conclusion Motivation of the child is important for success. Continuous involvement of the child and the family in the treatment will improve treatment compliance, success and patient satisfaction

A BURST-BAUS consensus document for best practice in the conduct of scrotal exploration for suspected testicular torsion : the Finding consensus for orchIdopeXy In Torsion (FIX-IT) study

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Jacqueline Emkes and Rachel Jury for their contribution to our protocol development with respect to patient and public involvement. Similarly, the authors would like to thank Dr Matthew Coward, Department of Urology, University of North Carolina, and Dr Selcuk Sarikaya, Department of Urology, University of Ankara, for their international perspectives and input to our study protocol. We would like to acknowledge the BAUS Trustees for allowing this collaboration. Unrelated to this work, The BURST Research Collaborative would like to acknowledge funding from the BJUI, the Urology Foundation, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Rosetrees Trust and Action Bladder Cancer UK. Veeru Kasivisvanathan is an Academic Clinical Lecturer funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. PubMed Indexed Collaborative Authors: Matthew Coward, Selcuk Sarikaya, Jacqueline Emkes, Rachel Jury. Research Funding Department of Health National Institute for Health Research National Institute for Health Research Rosetrees Trust Ferring Pharmaceuticals Urology Foundation University of North CarolinaPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Impact of Intraoperative Distractions on Patient Safety:A Prospective Descriptive Study Using Validated Instruments

BACKGROUND: There is emerging evidence indicating that distractions in the operating room (OR) are prevalent. Studies have shown a negative impact of distractions, but they have been conducted mostly with residents in simulated environments. We tested the hypothesis that intraoperative distractions are associated with deterioration in patient safety checks in the OR. METHODS: We assessed 24 elective urologic procedures. Blinded trained assessors (two surgeons, one psychologist) used validated instruments to prospectively assess in vivo frequency and severity of distractions (related to communication, phones/pagers, equipment/provisions, OR environment, other hospital departments, or a member of the OR team) and completion of safety-related tasks (related to the patient, equipment, and communication). Descriptive and correlational analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Mean case duration was 70 min (mean intraoperative time 31 min). A mean of 4.0 communication distractions (range 0-9) and 2.48 other distractions (range 0-5) were recorded per case (distraction rate of one per 10 min). Distractions from external visitors (addressed to the entire team or the surgeon) and distractions due to lack of coordination between hospital departments were most disruptive. Regarding safety checks, patient tasks were completed most often (85-100 %) followed by equipment tasks (75-100 %) and communication tasks (55-90 %). Correlational analyses showed that more frequent/severe communication distractions were linked to lower completion of patient checks intraoperatively (median rho -0.56, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Distractions are prevalent in ORs and in this study were linked to deterioration in intraoperative patient safety checks. Surgeons should be mindful of their tolerance to distractions. Surgical leadership can help control distractions and reduce their potential impact on patient safety and performance

Management of undescended testes: European Association of Urology/European Society for Paediatric Urology Guidelines

Context Undescended testis is the most common endocrinological disease in the male newborn period. Incidence varies between 1.0% and 4.6% in full-term neonates, with rates as high as 45% in preterm neonates. Failure or delay of treatment can result in reduced fertility and/or increased testicular cancer risk in adulthood. Objective To provide recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of boys with undescended testes which reduce the risk of impaired fertility and testicular cancer in adulthood. Evidence acquisition Embase and Pubmed were searched for all relevant publications, from 1990 to 2015 limited to English language. Data were narratively synthesized in light of methodological and clinical heterogeneity. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed. Evidence synthesis There is consensus that early treatment, by 18 months at the latest, for undescended testes is mandatory to avoid possible sequelae regarding fertility potential and cancer risk. The current standard therapy is orchidopexy, while hormonal therapy is still under debate. However, in some individuals the successful scrotal placement of previously undescended testes may not prevent potential negative long-term outcomes regarding fertility and testicular malignancy. Conclusions There is good evidence for early placement of undescended testes in the scrotal position to prevent potential impairment of fertility and reduce the risk of testicular malignancy. No consensus exists on the various forms of hormonal treatment, which are assessed on an individual basis