Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 143–148 | Cite as

Cognitive Assessment of Surgeons During Surgical Procedures: Influence of Time and Intraoperative Complications

  • Juliana Beneduzzi
  • Fernando A. M. HerbellaEmail author
  • Francisco Schlottmann
  • Marco G. Patti
Original Scientific Report
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

Surgeon’s performance may be influenced by several factors that may affect skills and judgement, which ultimately represents surgeon´s cognition. Cognition refers to all forms of knowing and awareness, such as perceiving, conceiving, remembering, reasoning, judging, imagining, and problem solving. This report aims to evaluate the effect of operative time and operative complications on surgeon´s cognition.

Methods

Forty-six surgeons (mean age 31 years, 78% males) assigned to an operation expected to last for at least 2 h, volunteered for the study. All participants underwent 3 cognitive tests at the beginning of the operation and hourly, until the end of the procedure: (a) concentration (serial sevens, counting down from 100 by sevens); (b) visual (fast counting, counting the number of circles with the same color among a series of circles); and (c) motor (trail making, connecting a set of numbered dots). Intraoperative complications were recorded.

Results

The visual test had a stable behavior along time. Concentration and motor tests tend to be performed faster. Intraoperative complications occurred in 5 (11%) cases (3 hemorrhage and 2 organ injuries). Performance time was stable for concentration and motor tests but visual test tends to be performed faster in cases with an intraoperative complication.

Conclusion

Our results showed that (1) time does not jeopardize surgeons’ cognition, but rather surgeons learned to perform the tests faster, and (2) complications do not decrease surgeons’ cognition.

Notes

Authors’ contribution

JB contributed to protocol/project development; data collection or management; data analysis; and manuscript writing/editing. FAMH involved in protocol/project development; data collection or management; data analysis; and manuscript writing/editing. FS and MGP performed manuscript writing/editing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest to report.

References

  1. 1.
    American Psychological Association. Dictionary of Psychology. https://dictionary.apa.org/cognition. Accessed 6 Dec 2018
  2. 2.
    Parker RS, Parker P (2017) The impact of sleep deprivation in military surgical teams: a systematic review. J R Army Med Corps 163(3):158–163.  https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2016-000640 (Epub 2016 Sep 13) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    American College of Surgeons (ACS) Committee on Perioperative Care (2016) Statement on distractions in the operating room. Bull Am Coll Surg 101(10):42–44Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mentis HM, Chellali A, Manser K, Cao CG, Schwaitzberg SD (2016) A systematic review of the effect of distraction on surgeon performance: directions for operating room policy and surgical training. Surg Endosc 30(5):1713–1724.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4443-z (Epub 2015 Jul 21) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Belykh E, Onaka NR, Abramov IT, Yağmurlu K, Byvaltsev VA, Spetzler RF, Nakaj P, Preul MC (2018) Systematic review of factors influencing surgical performance: practical recommendations for microsurgical procedures in neurosurgery. World Neurosurg 112:e182–e207.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tombaugh TN (2004) Trail making test A and B: normative data stratified by age and education. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 19(2):203–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rosenthal R, Hoffmann H, Clavien PA, Bucher HC, Dell-Kuster S (2015) Definition and classification of intraoperative complications (CLASSIC): Delphi study and pilot evaluation. World J Surg 39(7):1663–1671.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-015-3003-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dholakia S, Jeans JP, Khalid U, Dholakia S, D’Souza C, Nemeth K (2015) The association of noise and surgical-site infection in day-case hernia repairs. Surgery 157(6):1153–1156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.12.026 (Epub 2015 Feb 28) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moris DN, Linos D (2013) Music meets surgery: two sides to the art of “healing”. Surg Endosc 27(3):719–723.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2525-8 (Epub 2012 Oct 6) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Daniel F, Kapoula Z (2016) Binocular vision and the stroop test. Optom Vis Sci 93(2):194–208.  https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000774 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lehmann KS, Martus P, Little-Elk S, Maass H, Holmer C, Zurbuchen U, Bretthauer G, Buhr HJ, Ritz JP (2010) Impact of sleep deprivation on medium-term psychomotor and cognitive performance of surgeons: prospective cross-over study with a virtual surgery simulator and psychometric tests. Surgery 147(2):246–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2009.08.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mentis HM, Chellali A, Manser K, Cao CG, Schwaitzberg SD (2016) A systematic review of the effect of distraction on surgeon performance: directions for operating room policy and surgical training. Surg Endosc 30(5):1713–1724.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4443-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Manning RT (1982) The serial sevens test. Arch Intern Med 142(6):1192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bowie CR, Harvey PD (2006) Administration and interpretation of the trail making test. Nat Protoc 1(5):2277–2281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Park AE, Zahiri HR, Hallbeck MS, Augenstein V, Sutton E, Yu D, Lowndes BR, Bingener J (2017) Intraoperative, “Micro Breaks” with targeted stretching enhance surgeon physical function and mental focus: a multicenter cohort study. Ann Surg 265(2):340–346.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001665 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Engelmann C, Schneider M, Kirschbaum C, Grote G, Dingemann J, Schoof S, Ure BM (2011) Effects of intraoperative breaks on mental and somatic operator fatigue: a randomized clinical trial. Surg Endosc 25(4):1245–1250.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1350-1 (Epub 2010 Sep 11) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stucky CH, Cromwell KD, Voss RK, Chiang YJ, Woodman K, Lee JE, Cormier JN (2018) Surgeon symptoms, strain, and selections: systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical ergonomics. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 27:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2017.12.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slack PS, Coulson CJ, Ma X, Webster K, Proops DW (2008) The effect of operating time on surgeons’ muscular fatigue. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 90(8):651–657.  https://doi.org/10.1308/003588408X321710 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rieger A, Fenger S, Neubert S, Weippert M, Kreuzfeld S, Stoll R (2015) Psychophysical workload in the operating room: primary surgeon versus assistant. Surg Endosc 29(7):1990–1998.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3899-6 (Epub 2014 Oct 11) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keshavarz Panahi A, Cho S (2016) Prediction of muscle fatigue during minimally invasive surgery using recurrence quantification analysis. Minim Invasive Surg 2016:5624630.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5624630 (Epub 2016 May 24) Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Browne BJ, Van Susteren T, Onsager DR, Simpson D, Salaymeh B, Condon RE (1994) Influence of sleep deprivation on learning among surgical house staff and medical students. Surgery 115(5):604–610Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goldenberg MG, Fok KH, Ordon M, Pace KT, Lee JY (2017) Simulation-based laparoscopic surgery crisis resource management training-predicting technical and nontechnical skills. J Surg Educ.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.11.011 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Waddimba AC, Scribani M, Hasbrouck MA, Krupa N, Jenkins P, May JJ (2016) Resilience among employed physicians and mid-level practitioners in upstate New York. Health Serv Res 51(5):1706–1734.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12499 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vickers SM, Vickers AL (2017) Lessons learned from mentors and heroes on leadership and surgical resilience. J Gastrointest Surg 21(1):1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-016-3257-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kurek SJ Jr (2016) EAST 2016 presidential address: resilience. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 81(1):1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000001095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Minter RM (2018) Passion, integrity, resilience: core values to carry us forward 2017 Society of University Surgeons presidential address. Surgery.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2017.12.006. (Epub ahead of print)

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juliana Beneduzzi
    • 1
  • Fernando A. M. Herbella
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francisco Schlottmann
    • 2
  • Marco G. Patti
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryEscola Paulista de MedicinaSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations