Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Re-Validating the Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery Tool (OTAS-D): Cultural Adaptation, Refinement, and Psychometric Evaluation

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The nontechnical and team skills of surgical teams are critical for safety and efficiency in the operating room. Assessment of nontechnical and team skills can facilitate improvement by encouraging both self-reflection and team reflection, identifying training needs, and informing operating room (OR) team training approaches. The observational teamwork assessment for surgery (OTAS) tool is a well-validated and robust tool for capturing teamwork in the operating room. The aims of the present study were to systematically adapt and refine the OTAS for German-speaking OR staff and to test the adapted assessment tool (OTAS-D) for psychometric properties and metric equivalence.

Methods

The study was carried out in three stages: at stage 1, OTAS was translated into German. At stage 2, experienced German OR experts (surgeons, OR nurses, anesthetists) were interviewed. At stage 3, two blinded assessors observed 11 general surgical operations (general surgical and vascular procedures) and interrater reliability was tested for refined OTAS-D behavioral exemplars and scorings.

Results

The German OR experts confirmed the applicability and content validity of the vast majority of translated behavioral exemplars. After their evaluation, 32 items were changed slightly, six were changed substantially, and one item was added. During observations, perfect and substantial interobserver agreement was found for 77 behavioral exemplars (67.1 % of the items, kappa coefficient >0.60). Rating at all OTAS behaviors showed acceptable levels of reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.72).

Conclusions

The OTAS-D is a tool for valid and reliable assessment of nontechnical skills that contribute to safe and effective surgical performance in ORs staffed by German-speaking professionals. Furthermore, our study serves as an example for systematically adapting and customizing well-established observational tools across different healthcare environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM et al (2003) Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery 133:614–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mazzocco K, Petitti DB, Fong KT et al (2009) Surgical team behaviors and patient outcomes. Am J Surg 197:678–685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Shouhed D, Gewertz B, Wiegmann D et al (2012) Integrating human factors research and surgery: a review. Arch Surg 147:1141–1146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Manser T (2009) Teamwork and patient safety in dynamic domains of healthcare: a review of the literature. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 53:143–151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Armour Forse R, Bramble JD, McQuillan R (2011) Team training can improve operating room performance. Surgery 150:771–778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hull L, Arora S, Aggarwal R et al (2012) The impact of nontechnical skills on technical performance in surgery: a systematic review. J Am Coll Surg 214:214–230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Young-Xu Y, Neily J, Mills PD et al (2011) Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical morbidity. Arch Surg 146:1368–1373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Neily J, Mills PD, Young-Xu Y et al (2010) Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical mortality. JAMA 304:1693–1700

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Catchpole K, Mishra A, Handa A et al (2008) Teamwork and error in the operating room: analysis of skills and roles. Ann Surg 247:699–706

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hull L, Arora S, Kassab E et al (2011) Observational teamwork assessment for surgery: content validation and tool refinement. J Am Coll Surg 212:234–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Undre S, Healey AN, Darzi A et al (2006) Observational assessment of surgical teamwork: a feasibility study. World J Surg 30:1774–1783. doi:10.1007/s00268-005-0488-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Undre S, Sevdalis N, Vincent CA (2009) Observing and assessing surgical teams: the observational teamwork assessment for surgery (OTAS). In: Flin R, Mitchell L (eds) Safer Surgery. Ashgate, Farnham, pp 83–102

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sevdalis N, Lyons M, Healey AN et al (2009) Observational teamwork assessment for surgery: construct validation with expert versus novice raters. Ann Surg 249:1047–1051

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Amato S, Basilico O, Bevilacqua L et al (2010) Observational team work assessment for surgery as quality and safety improvement tool. Ig Sanita Pubbl 66:357–374

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pena ED (2007) Lost in translation: methodological considerations in cross-cultural research. Child Dev 78:1255–1264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sperber AD (2004) Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research. Gastroenterology 126:S124–S128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Flin R, Yule S, McKenzie L et al (2006) Attitudes to teamwork and safety in the operating theatre. Surgeon 4:145–151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Makary MA, Sexton JB, Freischlag JA et al (2006) Operating room teamwork among physicians and nurses: teamwork in the eye of the beholder. J Am Coll Surg 202:746–752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Undre S, Sevdalis N, Healey AN et al (2006) Teamwork in the operating theatre: cohesion or confusion? J Eval Clin Pract 12:182–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldana J (1984) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Sage Publications, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  21. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fletcher G, Flin R, McGeorge P et al (2003) Anaesthetists’ Non-technical Skills (ANTS): evaluation of a behavioural marker system. Br J Anaesth 90:580–588

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mishra A, Catchpole K, McCulloch P (2009) The Oxford NOTECHS System: reliability and validity of a tool for measuring teamwork behaviour in the operating theatre. Qual Saf Health Care 18:104–108

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yule S, Flin R, Paterson-Brown S et al (2006) Development of a rating system for surgeons’ non-technical skills. Med Educ 40:1098–1104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Paris CR, Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA (2000) Teamwork in multi-person systems: a review and analysis. Ergonomics 43:1052–1075

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yule S, Rowley D, Flin R et al (2009) Experience matters: comparing novice and expert ratings of non-technical skills using the NOTSS system. ANZ J Surg 79:154–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Russ S, Hull L, Rout S et al (2012) Observational teamwork assessment for surgery: feasibility of clinical and nonclinical assessor calibration with short-term training. Ann Surg 255:804–809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Abell N, Springer DW, Kamata A (2009) Developing and validating rapid assessment instruments. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Yule S, Flin R, Maran N et al (2008) Surgeons’ non-technical skills in the operating room: reliability testing of the NOTSS behavior rating system. World J Surg 32:548–556. doi:10.1007/s00268-007-9320-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hull L, Arora S, Symons NR et al (2012) Training faculty in nontechnical skill assessment: national Guidelines on Program Requirements. Ann Surg 258:370–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was funded in part by the Research and Teaching Program of the Medical Faculty, Munich University (FöFoLE, Grant No. 752). Authors L.H., S.R., and N.S. are affiliated with the Imperial Centre for Patient Safety and Service Quality (www.cpssq.org), which is funded by the National Institute for Health Research, UK.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Ziemssentr. 1, 80336, Munich, Germany

    Stefanie Passauer-Baierl & Matthias Weigl

  2. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK

    Louise Hull, Stephanie Russ & Nick Sevdalis

  3. Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Danilo Miskovic

Authors
  1. Stefanie Passauer-Baierl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Louise Hull
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Danilo Miskovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephanie Russ
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nick Sevdalis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Matthias Weigl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefanie Passauer-Baierl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Passauer-Baierl, S., Hull, L., Miskovic, D. et al. Re-Validating the Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery Tool (OTAS-D): Cultural Adaptation, Refinement, and Psychometric Evaluation. World J Surg 38, 305–313 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2299-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2299-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation