Optimizing Teamwork in the Operating Room: A Scoping Review of Actionable Teamwork Strategies.

Suboptimal teamwork in the operating room (OR) is a contributing factor in a significant proportion of preventable complications for surgical patients. Specifying behaviour is fundamental to closing evidence-practice gaps in healthcare. Current teamwork interventions, however, have yet to be synthesized in this way. This scoping review aimed to identify actionable strategies for use during surgery by mapping the existing literature according to the Action, Actor, Context, Target, Time (AACTT) framework. The databases MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Embase, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Cochrane, Scopus, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to April 5, 2022. Screening and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by pairs of independent reviewers. The search identified 9,289 references after the removal of duplicates. Across 249 studies deemed eligible for inclusion, eight types of teamwork interventions could be mapped according to the AACTT framework: bundle/checklists, protocols, audit and feedback, clinical practice guidelines, environmental change, cognitive aid, education, and other), yet many were ambiguous regarding the actors and actions involved. The 101 included protocol interventions appeared to be among the most actionable for the OR based on the clear specification of ACCTT elements, and their effectiveness should be evaluated and compared in future work.

Using an intersectionality lens to explore barriers and enablers to hepatitis C point-of-care testing: a qualitative study among people who inject drugs and service providers.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a significant global health burden, particularly among people who inject drugs. Rapid point-of-care HCV testing has emerged as a promising approach to improve HCV detection and linkage to care in harm reduction organizations such as needle and syringe programs. The objective of this study was to use an intersectionality lens to explore the barriers and enablers to point-of-care HCV testing in a needle and syringe program. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with clients (people who inject drugs) and service providers in a large community organization focused on the prevention of sexually transmitted and blood borne infections and harm reduction in Montreal, Canada. An intersectionality lens was used alongside the Theoretical Domains Framework to guide the formulation of research questions as well as data collection, analysis, and interpretation. RESULTS: We interviewed 27 participants (15 clients, 12 providers). For clients, four themes emerged: (1) understanding and perceptions of HCV testing, (2) the role of an accessible and inclusive environment, (3) the interplay of emotions and motivations in decision-making, and (4) the impact of intersectional stigma related to HCV, behaviors, and identities. For providers, five themes emerged: (1) knowledge, skills, and confidence for HCV testing, (2) professional roles and their intersection with identity and lived experience, (3) resources and integration of services, (4) social and emotional factors, and (5) behavioral regulation and incentives for HCV testing. Intersectional stigma amplified access, emotional and informational barriers to HCV care for clients. In contrast, identity and lived experience acted as powerful enablers for providers in the provision of HCV care. CONCLUSION: The application of an intersectionality lens provides a nuanced understanding of multilevel barriers and enablers to point-of-care HCV testing. Findings underscore the need for tailored strategies that address stigma, improve provider roles and communication, and foster an inclusive environment for equitable HCV care. Using an intersectionality lens in implementation research can offer valuable insights, guiding the design of equity-focused implementation strategies.

Efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying randomised controlled trials on hyperbaric oxygen treatment.

Introduction: Literature searches are routinely used by researchers for conducting systematic reviews as well as by healthcare providers, and sometimes patients, to quickly guide their clinical decisions. Using more than one database is generally recommended but may not always be necessary for some fields. This study aimed to determine the added value of searching additional databases beyond MEDLINE when conducting a literature search of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: This study consisted of two phases: a scoping review of all RCTs in the field of HBOT, followed by a a statistical analysis of sensitivity, precision, 'number needed to read' (NNR) and 'number unique' included by individual biomedical databases. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched without date or language restrictions up to December 31, 2022. Screening and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by pairs of independent reviewers. RCTs were included if they involved human subjects and HBOT was offered either on its own or in combination with other treatments. Results: Out of 5,840 different citations identified, 367 were included for analysis. CENTRAL was the most sensitive (87.2%) and had the most unique references (7.1%). MEDLINE had the highest precision (23.8%) and optimal NNR (four). Among included references, 14.2% were unique to a single database. Conclusions: Systematic reviews of RCTs in HBOT should always utilise multiple databases, which at minimum include MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL.

Association Between Surgeon/Anesthesiologist Sex Discordance and 1-year Mortality Among Adults Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery: A Population-based Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between surgeon-anesthesiologist sex discordance and patient mortality after noncardiac surgery. BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests different practice patterns exist among female and male physicians. However, the influence of physician sex on team-based practices in the operating room and subsequent patient outcomes remains unclear in the context of noncardiac surgery. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of adult Ontario residents who underwent index, inpatient noncardiac surgery between January 2007 and December 2017. The primary exposure was physician sex discordance (ie, the surgeon and anesthesiologist were of the opposite sex). The primary outcome was 1-year mortality. The association between physician sex discordance and patient outcomes was modeled using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression with adjustment for relevant physician, patient, and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Of 541,209 patients, 158,084 (29.2%) were treated by sex-discordant physician teams. Physician sex discordance was associated with a lower rate of mortality at 1 year [5.2% vs. 5.7%; adjusted HR: 0.95 (0.91-0.99)]. Patients treated by teams composed of female surgeons and male anesthesiologists were more likely to be alive at 1 year than those treated by all-male physician teams [adjusted HR: 0.90 (0.81-0.99)]. CONCLUSIONS: Noncardiac surgery patients had a lower likelihood of 1-year mortality when treated by sex-discordant surgeon-anesthesiologist teams. The likelihood of mortality was further reduced if the surgeon was female. Further research is needed to explore the underlying mechanisms of these observations and design strategies to diversify operating room teams to optimize performance and patient outcomes.

Barriers and enablers to and strategies for promoting domestic plasma donation throughout the world: Overarching protocol for three systematic reviews.

INTRODUCTION: The growing demand for plasma protein products has caused concern in many countries who largely rely on importing plasma products produced from plasma collected in the United States and Europe. Optimizing recruitment and retention of a diversity of plasma donors is therefore important for supporting national donation systems that can reliably meet the most critical needs of health services. This series of three systematic reviews aims to synthesize the known barriers and enablers to source plasma donation from the qualitative and survey-based literature and identify which strategies that have shown to be effective in promoting increased intention to, and actual donation of, source plasma. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Primary studies involving source or convalescent plasma donation via plasmapheresis will be included. The search strategy will capture all potentially relevant studies to each of the three reviews, creating a database of plasma donation literature. Study designs will be subsequently identified in the screening process to facilitate analysis according to the unique inclusion criteria of each review (i.e., qualitative, survey, and experimental designs). The search will be conducted in the electronic databases SCOPUS, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL without date or language restrictions. Studies will be screened, and data will be extracted, in duplicate by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved through consensus. Reviews 1 and 2 will draw on the Theoretical Domains Framework and Intersectionality, while Review 3 will be informed by Behaviour Change Intervention Ontologies. Directed content analysis and framework analysis (Review 1), and descriptive and inferential syntheses (Reviews 2 and 3), will be used, including meta-analyses if appropriate. DISCUSSION: This series of related reviews will serve to provide a foundation of what is known from the published literature about barriers and enablers to, and strategies for promoting, plasma donation worldwide.

The timing of booster sessions may not improve resuscitation skill retention among healthcare providers: a randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: Booster sessions can improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skill retention among healthcare providers; however, the optimal timing of these sessions is unknown. This study aimed to explore differences in skill retention based on booster session timing. Methods: After ethics approval, healthcare providers who completed an initial CPR training course were randomly assigned to either an early booster, late booster, or no booster group. Participants' mean resuscitation scores, time to initiate compressions, and time to successfully provide defibrillation were assessed immediately post-course and four months later using linear mixed models. Results: Seventy-three healthcare professionals were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences by randomization in the immediate post-test (9.7, 9.2, 8.9) or retention test (10.2, 9.8, and 9.5) resuscitation scores. No significant effects were observed for time to compression. Post-test time to defibrillation (mean ± SE: 112.8 ± 3.0 sec) was significantly faster compared to retention (mean ± SE: 120.4 ± 2.7 sec) (p = 0.04); however, the effect did not vary by randomization. Conclusion: No difference was observed in resuscitation skill retention between the early, late, and no booster groups. More research is needed to determine the aspects of a booster session beyond timing that contribute to skill retention.

Introduction: Des séances de rappel peuvent favoriser le maintien des compétences en réanimation cardio-pulmonaire (RCP) chez les professionnels de la santé; toutefois, le moment optimal pour offrir ces séances est inconnu. Cette étude visait à explorer les différences dans le maintien des compétences en fonction du moment où intervient la séance de rappel. Méthodes: Après avoir obtenu une approbation éthique, nous avons réparti au hasard des professionnels de la santé ayant suivi une formation initiale en RCP entre un groupe qui a reçu un rappel précoce, un groupe qui a eu un rappel tardif et un groupe qui n'a pas reçu de séance de rappel. Les scores moyens de réussite de la réanimation, le temps moyen pris avant de commencer les compressions et le temps moyen pris pour effectuer avec succès une défibrillation ont été évalués immédiatement après la séance et quatre mois plus tard, à l'aide de modèles mixtes linéaires. Résultats: Les données de 73 professionnels de la santé ont été analysées. Il n'y a pas eu de différences significatives à la suite de la randomisation dans les scores de réanimation au post-test immédiat (9,7; 9,2; 8,9) et au test sur le maintien des compétences (10,2; 9,8 et 9,5). Aucun effet significatif n'a été observé en lien avec le délai avant d'entamer les compressions. Le délai de défibrillation était significativement plus court après la séance (moyenne ± SE : 112,8 ± 3,0 sec) que lors du test de maintien des compétences (moyenne ± SE : 120,4 ± 2,7 sec) (p=0,04); cependant, l'effet n'a pas été différent d'un groupe à un autre. Conclusion: Aucune différence n'a été observée sur le plan du maintien des compétences en réanimation entre les groupes avec rappel précoce, avec rappel tardif et sans rappel. De plus amples travaux sont nécessaires pour déterminer les caractéristiques d'une séance de rappel, autres que le moment où elle intervient, qui contribueraient au maintien des compétences.

Professional Coaching as a Continuing Professional Development Intervention to Address the Physician Distress Epidemic.

ABSTRACT: Physician distress and burnout are reaching epidemic proportions, threatening physicians' capacities to develop and maintain competencies in the face of the increasingly demanding and complex realities of medical practice in today's world. In this article, we suggest that coaching should be considered both a continuing professional development intervention as well as an integral part of a balanced and proactive solution to physician distress and burnout. Unlike other interventions, coaching is intended to help individuals gain clarity in their life, rather than to treat a mental health condition or to provide advice, support, guidance, or knowledge/skills. Certified coaches are trained to help individuals discover solutions to complex problems and facilitate decision-making about what is needed to build and maintain capacity and take action. Across many sectors, coaching has been shown to enhance performance and reduce vulnerability to distress and burnout, but it has yet to be systematically implemented in medicine. By empowering physicians to discover and implement solutions to challenges, regain control over their lives, and act according to their own values, coaching can position physicians to become leaders and advocates for system-level change, while simultaneously prioritizing their own well-being.

Identifying positive and negative use of non-technical skills by anesthesiologists in the clinical operating room: An exploratory descriptive study.

Background: Teamwork is a critical competency in high-risk settings like the operating room (OR). While conventional approaches focus on describing and learning from negative performance, there may be value in learning from high-performing behaviour, particularly in specialties where serious safety events are relatively rare. This study aimed to explore both the positive and negative use of non-technical skills by anesthesia practitioners in the OR and situate them within the clinical OR context. Methods: This study employed a prospective observational design. Following research ethics approval, a sample of surgical cases in a tertiary hospital were recorded using the OR Black Box®. Data related to surgical phase timing, non-technical skills, team factors, and environmental factors were identified by analysts according to a modified Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model. We performed descriptive statistics and qualitative description of these observations. Results: We observed 25 surgical cases capturing 242 instances of positive non-technical skills among anesthesiologists in the operating room and 9 instances of negative demonstrations. Situational awareness was most frequently (n = 160) observed, followed by communication and teamwork skills (n = 82), and were most often demonstrated in the context of potential environmental distractions (e.g., doors opening, unnecessary interruptions). The least common category of positive non-technical skills observed was leadership (n = 3). Conclusions: Our findings show anesthesiologists are doing a lot "right" and there may be many opportunities for learning from positive practice in the clinical setting. These findings can inform future work to better understand and standardize best practices for non-technical performance in anesthesia.

Analyzing interprofessional teamwork in the operating room: An exploratory observational study using conventional and alternative approaches.

Intraoperative teamwork is vital for patient safety. Conventional tools for studying intraoperative teamwork typically rely on behaviorally anchored rating scales applied at the individual or team level, while others capture narrative information across several units of analysis. This prospective observational study characterizes teamwork using two conventional tools (Operating Theatre Team Non-Technical Skills Assessment Tool [NOTECHS]; Team Emergency Assessment Measure [TEAM]), and one alternative approach (modified-Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety [SEIPS] model). We aimed to explore the advantages and disadvantages of each for providing feedback to improve teamwork practice. Fifty consecutive surgical cases at a Canadian academic hospital were recorded with the OR Black Box®, analyzed by trained raters, and summarized descriptively. Teamwork performance was consistently high within and across cases rated with NOTECHS and TEAMS. For cases analyzed with the modified-SEIPS tool, both optimal and suboptimal teamwork behaviors were identified, and team resilience was frequently observed. NOTECHS and TEAM provided summative assessments and overall pattern descriptions, while SEIPS facilitated a deeper understanding of teamwork processes. As healthcare organizations continue to prioritize teamwork improvement, SEIPS may provide valuable insights regarding teamwork behavior and the broader context influencing performance. This may ultimately enhance the development and effectiveness of multi-level teamwork interventions.

Impact of coaching on physician wellness: A systematic review.

Physician wellness is critical for patient safety and quality of care. Coaching has been successfully and widely applied across many industries to enhance well-being but has only recently been considered for physicians. This review aimed to summarize the existing evidence on the effect of coaching by trained coaches on physician well-being, distress and burnout. MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched without language restrictions to December 21, 2022. Studies of any design were included if they involved physicians of any specialty undergoing coaching by trained coaches and assessed at least one measure along the wellness continuum. Pairs of independent reviewers determined reference eligibility. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and for Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures as well as inconsistent reporting. The search retrieved 2531 references, of which 14 were included (5 RCTs, 2 non-randomized controlled studies, 4 before-and-after studies, 2 mixed-methods studies, 1 qualitative study). There were 1099 participants across all included studies. Risk of bias was moderate or serious for non-RCTs, while the 5 RCTs were of lower risk. All quantitative studies reported effectiveness of coaching for at least one outcome assessed. The included qualitative study reported a perceived positive impact of coaching by participants. Evidence from available RCTs suggests coaching for physicians can improve well-being and reduce distress/burnout. Non-randomized interventional studies have similar findings but face many limitations. Consistent reporting and standardized outcome measures are needed.

Effectiveness of interprofessional teamwork interventions for improving occupational well-being among perioperative healthcare providers: a systematic review.

The occupational well-being of healthcare providers is crucial for safe and effective patient care, especially in the complex, high acuity operating room (OR) setting. There has been a recent proliferation of interventions to improve teamwork in the OR setting, but the impact of these interventions on clinician occupational well-being has yet to be systematically assessed. This systematic review aimed to summarize the impact of interprofessional teamwork interventions on occupational well-being among perioperative healthcare providers. We included all qualitative or quantitative peer-reviewed studies assessing a multidisciplinary teamwork intervention including members of at least two professions. We included seven studies which involved checklists (n = 2), simulation-based training (n = 2), and various teamwork development and training programs (n = 3). Five of the seven included studies reported no significant effect on job satisfaction, while one found a significant negative association between the intervention and job satisfaction (p < .0001), and another showed significant decrease in worker stress. Our findings highlight the gaps in our understanding of the impact of interprofessional teamwork interventions on healthcare worker well-being in the perioperative environment and the multi-level factors influencing OR teamwork, intervention implementation, and well-being across the different professions.

Interventions to facilitate interprofessional collaboration in the operating theatre: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Ineffective collaboration can increase adverse events in the operating theatre. When professionals work collaboratively, they are more likely to improve patient safety and outcomes. AIM: To identify interprofessional collaboration interventions involving operating theatre teams and describe their effect on facilitating communication, teamwork, and safety. METHODS: A scoping review of four databases. Results were analysed by identifying interventions and mapping their related outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty studies evaluated single or multi-faceted interventions. Despite low-quality study designs (no randomised controlled trials), four interventions (eg: briefings, checklists, team training, debriefing) improved communication and teamwork, and enhanced safety outcomes. Only one study, using team training, reported that organisational level interventions (eg: Standard Operating Procedures, Lean quality improvement management system) improved teamwork and safety outcomes. CONCLUSION: Several studies reported interventions enhanced interprofessional collaboration within operating theatre teams. Although findings were in favour of improved communication and teamwork, more rigorous research is required.

Interprofessional Collaboration in the OR: A Qualitative Study of Nurses' Perspectives.

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in the OR enhances safe and effective patient care. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore perioperative nurses' perspectives on their contributions to IPC. We conducted a secondary analysis of 19 semistructured interviews with perioperative RNs and completed inductive thematic analysis with subsequent categorization of the themes into the Interprofessional Education for Collaborative Patient-Centred Practice Framework. Nurses expressed the importance of being heard through effective communication, feeling confident in their role, being aware of interdependent roles, and sharing a common understanding. From nurses' perspectives, use of structured processes enabled organization of interdisciplinary patient care. Nurses showed leadership skills when they anticipated the needs of the team and recognized they needed support to develop these skills. They contributed to IPC through their shared understanding of common goals, leadership skills in the OR, and active involvement in delivering structured processes.

Selecting implementation models, theories, and frameworks in which to integrate intersectional approaches.

BACKGROUND: Models, theories, and frameworks (MTFs) provide the foundation for a cumulative science of implementation, reflecting a shared, evolving understanding of various facets of implementation. One under-represented aspect in implementation MTFs is how intersecting social factors and systems of power and oppression can shape implementation. There is value in enhancing how MTFs in implementation research and practice account for these intersecting factors. Given the large number of MTFs, we sought to identify exemplar MTFs that represent key implementation phases within which to embed an intersectional perspective. METHODS: We used a five-step process to prioritize MTFs for enhancement with an intersectional lens. We mapped 160 MTFs to three previously prioritized phases of the Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) framework. Next, 17 implementation researchers/practitioners, MTF experts, and intersectionality experts agreed on criteria for prioritizing MTFs within each KTA phase. The experts used a modified Delphi process to agree on an exemplar MTF for each of the three prioritized KTA framework phases. Finally, we reached consensus on the final MTFs and contacted the original MTF developers to confirm MTF versions and explore additional insights. RESULTS: We agreed on three criteria when prioritizing MTFs: acceptability (mean = 3.20, SD = 0.75), applicability (mean = 3.82, SD = 0.72), and usability (median = 4.00, mean = 3.89, SD = 0.31) of the MTF. The top-rated MTFs were the Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice to Promote Quality Care for the 'Identify the problem' phase (mean = 4.57, SD = 2.31), the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research for the 'Assess barriers/facilitators to knowledge use' phase (mean = 5.79, SD = 1.12), and the Behaviour Change Wheel for the 'Select, tailor, implement interventions' phase (mean = 6.36, SD = 1.08). CONCLUSIONS: Our interdisciplinary team engaged in a rigorous process to reach consensus on MTFs reflecting specific phases of the implementation process and prioritized each to serve as an exemplar in which to embed intersectional approaches. The resulting MTFs correspond with specific phases of the KTA framework, which itself may be useful for those seeking particular MTFs for particular KTA phases. This approach also provides a template for how other implementation MTFs could be similarly considered in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework Registration: osf.io/qgh64.

Bringing the patient voice into the operating room: engaging patients in surgical safety research with the Operating Room Black Box®.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is one of the most common patient experiences in the health care system. Yet, efforts to engage patients in surgical safety research have not matched those of other health care fields. This is a critical issue given the nature of surgery inhibits patients' abilities to advocate for themselves as they are typically under anesthetic when the procedure is performed. We partnered with patients throughout our research program, which uses the Operating Room Black Box® to enhance surgical patient safety through transparent and proactive analysis of human factors to detect and prevent avoidable errors. MAIN BODY: In this article, we outline the need for, and our approach to, patient engagement in surgical safety research. Our approach included a series of planned activities and skill development opportunities designed to build capacity and bring together patients, clinicians, and researchers to inform research and practice. We also conducted evaluation surveys during the first year of our program, which have indicated a positive experience by both patient partners and the research team. CONCLUSION: We believe our approach can serve as an important first step toward building a model for patient engagement in the surgical safety field and could significantly contribute to improved quality of care and outcomes for surgical patients.

Although surgery is one of the most common patient experiences, patients have not been engaged in surgical safety research. Patients were engaged as patient advisors in the use of the Operating Room Black Box^® at The Ottawa Hospital. The Operating Room Black Box^® is a tool that is used in the operating room (OR) which captures audio, video, patient vital signs and other information that are analyzed for research purposes. The aim of the OR Black Box^® is to learn from experience and improve practice and care. Patient advisors influenced the nature of the activities undertaken, co-developed the communication materials for patients, evaluated patient engagement practices, and disseminated the research results. These patient engagement activities are an important first step in engaging patients in surgical safety research.

Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen treatment to treat COVID-19 pneumonia: a living systematic review update.

INTRODUCTION: As the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, new effective treatment options are essential for reducing morbidity and mortality as well as the strain placed on the healthcare system. Since publication of our initial review on hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) for hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients, interest in HBOT for COVID-19 has grown and additional studies have been published. METHODS: For this living systematic review update the previously published search strategy (excluding Google Scholar) was adopted with an extension from 01 February 2021 to 01 April 2022. Study inclusion criteria, data extraction, risk of bias estimation and dispute resolution methods were repeated. RESULTS: Two new studies enrolling 127 patients were included in this update, taking the total to eight studies with 224 patients. Both new studies were randomised controlled trials, one at moderate and one at high risk of bias. Across these eight studies, 114 patients were treated with HBOT. All reported improved clinical outcomes without observation of any serious adverse events. Meta-analysis remained unjustified given the high heterogeneity between studies and incomplete reporting. CONCLUSIONS: This updated living systematic review provides further evidence on the safety and effectiveness of HBOT to treat acute hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients.

Tranexamic acid for prevention of bleeding in cesarean delivery: An overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding is the leading cause of maternal mortality in the world. Tranexamic acid reduces bleeding in trauma and surgery. Several systematic reviews of randomized trials have investigated tranexamic acid in the prevention of bleeding in cesarean delivery. However, the conclusions from systematic reviews are conflicting. This overview aims to summarize the evidence and explore the reasons for conflicting conclusions across the systematic reviews. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted from inception to April 2021. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed by two independent reviewers. A Measurement Tool to Assess Reviews 2 and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews were used for study appraisal. A qualitative synthesis of evidence is presented. RESULTS: In all, 14 systematic reviews were included in our analysis. Across these reviews, there were 32 relevant randomized trials. A modest reduction in blood transfusions and bleeding outcomes was found by most systematic reviews. Overall confidence in results varied from low to critically low. All of the included systematic reviews were at high risk of bias. Quality of evidence from randomized trials was uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic reviews investigating prophylactic tranexamic acid in cesarean delivery are heterogeneous in terms of methodological and reporting quality. Tranexamic acid may reduce blood transfusion and bleeding outcomes, but rigorous well-designed research is needed due to the limitations of the included studies. Data on safety and adverse effects are insufficient to draw conclusions.

How gender shapes interprofessional teamwork in the operating room: a qualitative secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial implications for healthcare provider practice and patient outcomes, gender has yet to be systematically explored with regard to interprofessional operating room (OR) teamwork. We aimed to explore and describe how gender and additional social identity factors shape experiences and perceptions of teamwork in the OR. METHODS: This study was a qualitative secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews with OR team members conducted between November 2018 and July 2019. Participants were recruited across hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We conducted both purposive and snowball sampling until data saturation was reached. Transcripts were analyzed thematically by two independent research team members, moving from open to axial coding. RESULTS: Sixty-six interviews of OR healthcare professionals were completed: anesthesia (n=17), nursing (n=19), perfusion (n=2), and surgery (n=26). Traditional gender roles, norms, and stereotypes were perceived and experienced by both women and men, but with different consequences. Both women and men participants described challenges that women face in the OR, such as being perceived negatively for displaying leadership behaviours. Participants also reported that interactions and behaviours vary depending on the team gender composition, and that other social identities, such as age and race, often interact with gender. Nevertheless, participants indicated a belief that the influence of gender in the OR may be modified. CONCLUSIONS: The highly gendered reality of the OR creates an environment conducive to breakdowns in communuication and patient safety risks in addition to diminishing team morale, psychological safety, and provider well-being. Consequently, until teamwork interventions adequately account for gender, they are unlikely to be optimally effective or sustainable.