ABSTRACT
Background: The 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. Methods: This 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). Results: As 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). Conclusion: Aspects 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.
ABSTRACT
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.
Outcomes of surgery depend on patient characteristics and surgeon expertise, but also on teamwork, notably communication. The present study introduces the StOP? protocol, in which the surgeon informs the team about the current status (St), objectives regarding next steps (O), and potential problems (P), and encourages the team to ask questions and raise concerns (?). The results suggest an effect of the StOP? intervention on patient mortality, risk of unplanned reoperation, and duration of hospital stay, but not on surgical-site infections. The study is promising regarding the effect of structured intraoperative communication on important patient outcomes. The study compared patient outcomes at baseline and after implementation of the StOP? protocol, which enhances exchange of structured information within the interdisciplinary surgical team during the course of the operation. The intention-to-treat analyses in this multicentre before-and-after study of 8256 patients undergoing general surgery showed no differences between baseline and intervention for surgical-site infections, but revealed reduced mortality and unplanned reoperations, and fewer prolonged hospital stays during the intervention period.
