BackgroundTense communication and disruptive behaviors during surgery have often been attributed to surgeons’ personality or hierarchies, while situational triggers for tense communication were neglected. Goals of this study were to assess situational triggers of tense communication in the operating room and to assess its impact on collaboration quality within the surgical team.Methods and findingsThe prospective observational study was performed in two university hospitals in Europe. Trained external observers assessed communication in 137 elective abdominal operations led by 30 different main surgeons. Objective observations were related to perceived collaboration quality by all members of the surgical team. A total of 340 tense communication episodes were observed (= 0.57 per hour); mean tensions in surgeries with tensions was 1.21 per hour. Individual surgeons accounted for 24% of the variation in tensions, while situational aspects accounted for 76% of variation. A total of 72% of tensions were triggered by coordination problems; 21.2% by task-related problems and 9.1% by other issues. More tensions were related to lower perceived teamwork quality for all team members except main surgeons. Coordination-triggered tensions significantly lowered teamwork quality for second surgeons, scrub technicians and circulators.ConclusionsAlthough individual surgeons differ in their tense communication, situational aspects during the operation had a much more important influence on the occurrence of tensions, mostly triggered by coordination problems. Because tensions negatively impact team collaboration, surgical teams may profit from improving collaboration, for instance through training, or through reflexivity.

Background Operations require collaboration between surgeons, anaesthetia professionals, and nurses. The aim of this study was to determine whether intraoperative briefings influence patient outcomes. Methods In a before-and-after controlled trial (9 months baseline; 9 months intervention), intraoperative briefings were introduced in four general surgery centres between 2015 and 2018. During the operation, the responsible surgeon (most senior surgeon present) briefed the surgical team using the StOP? protocol about: progress of the operation (Status), next steps (Objectives), possible problems (Problems), and encouraged asking questions (?). Differences between baseline and intervention were analysed regarding surgical-site infections (primary outcome), mortality, unplanned reoperations, and duration of hospital stay (secondary outcomes), using inverse probability of treatment (IPT) weighting based on propensity scores. Results In total, 8256 patients underwent surgery in the study. Endpoint data were available for 7745 patients (93.8 per cent). IPT-weighted and adjusted intention-to-treat analyses showed no differences in surgical-site infections between baseline and intervention (9.8 versus 9.6 per cent respectively; adjusted difference (AD) –0.15 (95 per cent c.i. −1.45 to 1.14) per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.92, 95 per cent c.i. 0.83 to 1.15; P = 0.797), but there were reductions in mortality (1.6 versus 1.1 per cent; AD –0.54 (−1.04 to −0.03) per cent; OR 0.60, 0.39 to 0.92; P = 0.018), unplanned reoperations (6.4 versus 4.8 per cent; AD –1.66 (−2.69 to −0.62) per cent; OR 0.72, 0.59 to 0.89; P = 0.002), and fewer prolonged hospital stays (21.6 versus 19.8 per cent; AD –1.82 (−3.48 to −0.15) per cent; OR 0.87, 0.77 to 0.98; P = 0.024). Conclusion Short intraoperative briefings improve patient outcomes and should be performed routinely.

BackgroundThe team timeout (TTO) is a safety checklist to be performed by the surgical team prior to incision. Exchange of critical information is, however, important not only before but also during an operation and members of surgical teams frequently feel insufficiently informed by the operating surgeon about the ongoing procedure. To improve the exchange of critical information during surgery, the StOP?-protocol was developed: At appropriate moments during the procedure, the leading surgeon briefly interrupts the operation and informs the team about the current Status (St) and next steps/objectives (O) of the operation, as well as possible Problems (P), and encourages questions of other team members (?). The StOP?-protocol draws attention to the team. Anticipating the occurrence of StOP?-protocols may support awareness of team processes and quality issues from the beginning and thus support other interventions such as the TTO; however, it also may signal an additional demand and contribute to a phenomenon akin to “checklist fatigue.” We investigated if, and how, the introduction of the StOP?-protocol influenced TTO quality.MethodsThis was a prospective intervention study employing a pre-post design. In the visceral surgical departments of two university hospitals and one urban hospital the quality of 356 timeouts (out of 371 included operation) was assessed by external observers before (154) and after (202) the introduction of the StOP?-briefing. Timeout quality was rated in terms of timeout completeness (number of checklist items mentioned) and timeout quality (engagement, pace, social atmosphere, noise).ResultsAs compared to the baseline, after the implementation of the StOP?-protocol, observed timeouts had higher completeness ratings (F = 8.69, p = 0.003) and were rated by observers as higher in engagement (F = 13.48, p < 0.001), less rushed (F = 14.85, p < 0.001), in a better social atmosphere (F = 5.83, p < 0.016) and less noisy (F = 5.35, p < 0.022).ConclusionAspects of TTO are affected by the anticipation of StOP?-protocols. However, rather than harming the timeout goals by inducing “checklist fatigue,” it increases completeness and quality of the team timeout.