The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an unprecedented reduction in the delivery of surgical services worldwide, especially in non-urgent, non-cancer procedures. A prolonged period without operating (or ‘layoff period’) can result in surgeons experiencing skill fade (both technical and non-technical) and a loss of confidence. While senior surgeons in the UK may be General Medical Council (GMC) validated and capable of performing a procedure, a loss of ‘currency’ may increase the risk of error and intraoperative patient harm, particularly if unexpected or adverse events are encountered. Dual surgeon operating may mitigate risks to patient safety as surgeons regain currency while returning to non-urgent operating and may also be beneficial after the greatly reduced activity observed during the COVID-19 pandemic for low-volume complex operations. In addition, it could be a useful tool for annual appraisal, sharing updated surgical techniques and helping team cohesion. This paper explores lessons from aviation, a leading industry in human factors principles, for regaining surgical skills currency. We discuss real and perceived barriers to dual surgeon operating including finance, training, substantial patient waiting lists, and intraoperative power dynamics.

Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website.Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre -including this research content -immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

High-risk organisations (HRO), including aviation, undergo formal communication training, with emphasis on safety-critical moments. Such training is not widespread or mandatory in healthcare, and while there are many differences both share the 'human element' with circumstances leading to an increased risk of harm. A typical operating theatre consists of an operating surgeon, and an assisting surgeon, roles that may change throughout the course of a procedure. Similarly, a training aircraft or multi-crew cockpit (flight deck) has a pilot in control, or 'pilot flying', and a 'pilot not flying'. Both interact with wider teams, for example the scrub team and air traffic controllers, respectively. Surgical error is the second most prevalent cause of preventable harm to patients after drug errors. Every year in the UK National Health Service (NHS), there are typically 500 never events, 21,000 serious incidents, and many more episodes of physical or psychological harm. Ineffective communication (46%) is the most common behavioural factor leading to a never event. In this review, we examine the concept of 'sterile cockpit', use of unambiguous terminology, callsigns, important information readback, sharing of mental models, and the mini-brief, and how these may be used to reduce patient harm during safety-critical moments.

Intraoperative critical events are rarely experienced by individual surgeons but are commonly experienced at a workforce level. Finding unfamiliar or unexpected pathology, anatomy, haemorrhage or an iatrogenic organ or structure injury cannot be completely eliminated in the complex surgical environment. It is vital that an appropriate, safe response to these infrequent events takes place to prevent possible further harm to patients. This paper introduces ‘Patient, Procedure, People’, a tool adapted from aviation threat and error management (TEM) training. It allows surgical teams to improve situational awareness (SA), communicate effectively, flatten team hierarchy gradients and improve decision-making before responding to critical events. We review factors contributing to poor decision-making, with resulting errors. These include loss of SA (tunnel vision), acute stress reactions (fight–flight or freeze–hide) and limbic hijacking (surprise and startle events). Events may cause workload to increase beyond cognitive capacity, further exacerbating the situation. After completing initial actions to achieve a temporary ‘place of safety’, surgical teams may use the tool to effectively manage threat or mitigate error. Aviation is a high-reliability organisation that has pioneered human factors research and training. Airline pilots undergo regular simulated emergencies assessment, including mandatory human factors assessment. Although the complexities of the operating theatre do not currently lend themselves to high-fidelity simulation as in aviation, valuable transferrable lessons can be learnt from aviation’s approach to TEM.

Introduction National selection for higher surgical training (ST3+) recruitment in the UK is competitive. The process must prioritise patient safety while being credible, impartial and fair. During the COVID-19 pandemic, all face-to-face interviews were cancelled. Selection was based on a controversial isolated self-assessment score with no evidence checking taking place. From 2021, selection will take place entirely online. Although this has cost and time advantages, new challenges emerge. Methods We review surgical selection as it transitions to an online format and suggest validated methods that could be adapted from High Reliability Organisations (HRO). Findings Virtual selection methods include video interviewing, online examinations and aptitude testing. These tools have been used in business for many years, but their predictive value in surgery is largely unknown. In healthcare, the established online Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) examines generic professional capabilities. Its scope, however, is too limited to be used in isolation. Candidates and interviewers alike may have concerns about the technical aspects of virtual recruitment. The significance of human factors must not be overlooked in the online environment. Surgery can learn from HROs, such as aviation. Pilot and air traffic control selection is integral to ensuring safety. These organisations have already established digital selection methods for psychological aptitude, professional capabilities and manual dexterity. Conclusion National selection for higher surgical training (ST3+) can learn from HROs, using validated methods to prioritise patient safety while being acceptable to candidates, trainers and health service recruiters.