Developing Surgical Teams: Theory
Although excellence in the care of a surgical patient depends in part on the medical knowledge and technical skill of the surgeon, such attributes are not necessarily sufficient. In addition, the expert functioning of the teams working with the surgeon in the perioperative setting is critical to a successful outcome. Developing highly reliable surgical teams, therefore, is essential for safe, effective patient care. Unfortunately, more often than not, surgical teamwork falls short of this ideal. For the surgical educator, the challenge thus becomes overcoming ingrained patterns of detrimental behavior among practicing clinicians and inculcating students in team-based competencies that will improve the quality of care. (S)he can meet such a challenge by adopting human factors (HF) principles when teaching and training inter-professional teams. The next two chapters will discuss how to develop such an approach by first addressing the theoretical underpinnings of HF concepts in the present chapter, then by demonstrating applications of these concepts to promote highly reliable team function in general and using a specific example. In doing so, they will combine to address the following objectives: (1) discussing the role of HF in promoting safe surgical care, (2) applying HF concepts to develop highly reliable surgical teams, and (3) illustrating such an application through a discussion of the development of simulation-based team training in surgery at LSU Health New Orleans Health Sciences Center.
KeywordsSurgical teams Human factors High reliability Teamwork Simulation Inter-professional education Surgical education Checklists Briefings Team training
- 1.Densen, P. (2011). Challenges and opportunities facing medical education. Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 122, 48–58.Google Scholar
- 2.Greiner, A. C., & Knebel, E. (Eds.). (2003). Health professions education: A bridge to quality. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- 3.IOM (Institute of Medicine). (2010). Redesigning continuing education in the health professions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- 4.Anonymous. What is human factors and ergonomics? Benchmark Research & Safety, Inc. http://www.benchmarkrs.com/main/human-factors/what.aspx. Accessed 20 Jan 2017.
- 5.Adams, D. (2006). A layman’s introduction to human factors in aircraft accident and incident investigation. Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) Safety Information Paper. B2006/0094. Canberra City, ACT.Google Scholar
- 6.Christensen, J. M., Topmiller, D. A., & Gill, R. T. (1988). Human factors definitions revisited. Human Factors Society Bulletin, 31, 7.Google Scholar
- 9.Fackler, M.. Nuclear disaster in Japan was avoidable, critics contend. New York Times, 3/9/2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/world/asia/critics-say-japan-ignored-warnings-of-nuclear-disaster.html?_r=0. Accessed 3 Feb 2017.
- 10.US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board. (2014). Investigation report: Explosion and fire at the Macondo well 1 and 2 (Report No. 2010-10-I-OS). Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- 11.Associated Press. Third wrong-sided brain surgery at R.I. hospital. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21981965. Accessed 28 Nov 2016.
- 14.The Eras Society. http://www.erassociety.org/. Accessed 28 Nov 2016.
- 15.Haynes, A. B., Weiser, T. G., Berry, W. R., Lipsitz, S. R., Breizat, A. H., Dellinger, E. P., Herbosa, T., Joseph, S., Kibatala, P. L., Lapitan, M. C., Merry, A. F., Moorthy, K., Reznick, R. K., Taylor, B., Gawande, A. A., & Safe Surgery Saves Lives Study Group. (2009). A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. The New England Journal of Medicine, 360, 491–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Joint Commission. The universal protocol for preventing wrong site, wrong procedure, wrong person surgeryTM. The Joint Commission. http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/UP_Poster.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2017.
- 18.Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Managing the unexpected: Assuring high performance in the age of complexity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- 19.Westrum, R. (2004). A typology of organisational cultures. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 13(Suppl 2), ii22–ii27.Google Scholar
- 21.2014 User Comparative Database Report. Content last reviewed March 2014. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/quality-patient-safety/patientsafetyculture/hospital/2014/index.html.
- 22.Runciman, B., & Walton, M. (2007). Safety and ethics in healthcare: A guide to getting it right. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- 23.Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
- 27.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (STEPPS)TM. http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/education/curriculum-tools/teamstepps/index.html. Accessed 3 Feb 2017.
- 32.Helmrich, R. L., & Davies, J. M. (1994). Team performance in the operating room. In M. S. Bogner (Ed.), Human error in medicine (pp. 225–253). Hillside: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 33.Nakarada-Kordic, I., Weller, J. M., Webster, C. S., Cumin, D., Frampton, C., Boyd, M., & Merry, A. F. (2016). Assessing the similarity of mental models of operating room team members and implications for patient safety: A prospective, replicated study. BMC Medical Education, 16(1), 229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Weigl, M., Stefan, P., Abhari, K., Wucherer, P., Fallavollita, P., Lazarovici, M., Weidert, S., Euler, E., & Catchpole, K. (2016). Intra-operative disruptions, surgeon’s mental workload, and technical performance in a full-scale simulated procedure. Surgical Endoscopy, 30(2), 559–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar