Combining Systems and Teamwork Approaches to Enhance the Effectiveness of Safety Improvement Interventions in Surgery: The Safer Delivery of Surgical Services (S3) Program.

IMPORTANCE: Patient safety improvement interventions usually address either work systems or team culture. We do not know which is more effective, or whether combining approaches is beneficial. OBJECTIVE: To compare improvement in surgical team performance after interventions addressing teamwork culture, work systems, or both. DESIGN: Suite of 5 identical controlled before-after intervention studies, with preplanned analysis of pooled data for indirect comparisons of strategies. SETTING: Operating theatres in 5 UK hospitals performing elective orthopedic, plastic, or vascular surgery PARTICIPANTS:: All operating theatres staff, including surgeons, nurses, anaesthetists, and others INTERVENTIONS:: 4-month safety improvement interventions, using teamwork training (TT), systems redesign and standardization (SOP), Lean quality improvement, SOP + TT combination, or Lean + TT combination. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Team technical and nontechnical performance and World Health Organization (WHO) checklist compliance, measured for 3 months before and after intervention using validated scales. Pooled data analysis of before-after change in active and control groups, comparing combined versus single and systems versus teamwork interventions, using 2-way ANOVA. RESULTS: We studied 453 operations, (255 intervention, 198 control). TT improved nontechnical skills and WHO compliance (P < 0.001), but not technical performance; systems interventions (Lean & SOP, 2 & 3) improved nontechnical skills and technical performance (P < 0.001) but improved WHO compliance less. Combined interventions (4 & 5) improved all performance measures except WHO time-out attempts, whereas single approaches (1 & 2 & 3) improved WHO compliance less (P < 0.001) and failed to improve technical performance. CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE: Safety interventions combining teamwork training and systems rationalization are more effective than those adopting either approach alone. This has important implications for safety improvement strategies in hospitals.

Lean Participative Process Improvement: Outcomes and Obstacles in Trauma Orthopaedics.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of a "systems" approach using Lean methodology to improve surgical care, as part of a programme of studies investigating possible synergy between improvement approaches. SETTING: A controlled before-after study using the orthopaedic trauma theatre of a UK Trust hospital as the active site and an elective orthopaedic theatre in the same Trust as control. PARTICIPANTS: All staff involved in surgical procedures in both theatres. INTERVENTIONS: A one-day "lean" training course delivered by an experienced specialist team was followed by support and assistance in developing a 6 month improvement project. Clinical staff selected the subjects for improvement and designed the improvements. OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared technical and non-technical team performance in theatre using WHO checklist compliance evaluation, "glitch count" and Oxford NOTECHS II in a sample of directly observed operations, and patient outcome (length of stay, complications and readmissions) for all patients. We collected observational data for 3 months and clinical data for 6 months before and after the intervention period. We compared changes in measures using 2-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: We studied 576 cases before and 465 after intervention, observing the operation in 38 and 41 cases respectively. We found no significant changes in team performance or patient outcome measures. The intervention theatre staff focused their efforts on improving first patient arrival time, which improved by 20 minutes after intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This version of "lean" system improvement did not improve measured safety processes or outcomes. The study highlighted an important tension between promoting staff ownership and providing direction, which needs to be managed in "lean" projects. Space and time for staff to conduct improvement activities are important for success.

Quality Improvement in Surgery Combining Lean Improvement Methods with Teamwork Training: A Controlled Before-After Study.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effectiveness of combining teamwork training and lean process improvement, two distinct approaches to improving surgical safety. We conducted a controlled interrupted time series study in a specialist UK Orthopaedic hospital incorporating a plastic surgery team (which received the intervention) and an Orthopaedic theatre team acting as a control. STUDY DESIGN: We used a 3 month intervention with 3 months data collection period before and after it. A combined teamwork training and lean process improvement intervention was delivered by an experienced specialist team. Before and after the intervention we evaluated team non-technical skills using NOTECHS II, technical performance using the glitch rate and WHO checklist compliance using a simple 3 point scale. We recorded complication rate, readmission rate and length of hospital stay data for 6 months before and after the intervention. RESULTS: In the active group, but not the control group, full compliance with WHO Time Out (T/O) increased from 14 to 71% (p = 0.032), Sign Out attempt rate (S/O) increased from 0% to 50% (p<0.001) and Oxford NOTECHS II scores increased after the intervention (P = 0.058). Glitch rate decreased in the active group and increased in the control group (p = 0.001). Complications and length of stay appeared to rise in the control group and fall in the active group. CONCLUSIONS: Combining teamwork training and systems improvement enhanced both technical and non-technical operating team process measures, and were associated with a trend to better safety outcome measures in a controlled study comparison. We suggest that approaches which address both system and culture dimensions of safety may prove valuable in reducing risks to patients.

The effect of teamwork training on team performance and clinical outcome in elective orthopaedic surgery: a controlled interrupted time series study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of aviation-style teamwork training in improving operating theatre team performance and clinical outcomes. SETTING: 3 operating theatres in a UK district general hospital, 1 acting as a control group and the other 2 as the intervention group. PARTICIPANTS: 72 operations (37 intervention, 35 control) were observed in full by 2 trained observers during two 3-month observation periods, before and after the intervention period. INTERVENTIONS: A 1-day teamwork training course for all staff, followed by 6 weeks of weekly in-service coaching to embed learning. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured team non-technical skills using Oxford NOTECHS II, (evaluating the whole team and the surgical, anaesthetic and nursing subteams, and evaluated technical performance using the Glitch count. We evaluated compliance with the WHO checklist by recording whether time-out (T/O) and sign-out (S/O) were attempted, and whether T/O was fully complied with. We recorded complications, re-admissions and duration of hospital stay using hospital administrative data. We compared the before-after change in the intervention and control groups using 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and regression modelling. RESULTS: Mean NOTECHS II score increased significantly from 71.6 to 75.4 in the active group but remained static in the control group (p=0.047). Among staff subgroups, the nursing score increased significantly (p=0.006), but the anaesthetic and surgical scores did not. The attempt rate for WHO T/O procedures increased significantly in both active and control groups, but full compliance with T/O improved only in the active group (p=0.003). Mean glitch rate was unchanged in the control group but increased significantly (7.2-10.2/h, p=0.002) in the active group. CONCLUSIONS: Teamwork training was associated with improved non-technical skills in theatre teams but also with a rise in operative glitches.

A combined teamwork training and work standardisation intervention in operating theatres: controlled interrupted time series study.

BACKGROUND: Teamwork training and system standardisation have both been proposed to reduce error and harm in surgery. Since the approaches differ markedly, there is potential for synergy between them. DESIGN: Controlled interrupted time series with a 3 month intervention and observation phases before and after. SETTING: Operating theatres conducting elective orthopaedic surgery in a single hospital system (UK Hospital Trust). INTERVENTION: Teamwork training based on crew resource management plus training and follow-up support in developing standardised operating procedures. Focus of subsequent standardisation efforts decided by theatre staff. MEASURES: Paired observers watched whole procedures together. We assessed non-technical skills using NOTECHS II, technical performance using glitch rate and compliance with WHO checklist using a simple quality tool. We measured complication and readmission rates and hospital stay using hospital administrative records. Before/after change was compared in the active and control groups using two-way ANOVA and regression models. RESULTS: 1121 patients were operated on before and 1100 after intervention. 44 operations were observed before and 50 afterwards. Non-technical skills (p=0.002) and WHO compliance (p<0.001) improved significantly after the intervention in the active versus the control group. Glitch count improved in both groups and there was no significant effect on clinical outcomes. DISCUSSION: Combined training in teamwork and system improvement causes marked improvements in team behaviour and WHO performance, but not technical performance or outcome. These findings are consistent with the synergistic hypothesis, but larger controlled studies with a strong implementation strategy are required to test potential outcome effects.

Effectiveness of facilitated introduction of a standard operating procedure into routine processes in the operating theatre: a controlled interrupted time series.

BACKGROUND: Standard operating procedures (SOPs) should improve safety in the operating theatre, but controlled studies evaluating the effect of staff-led implementation are needed. METHODS: In a controlled interrupted time series, we evaluated three team process measures (compliance with WHO surgical safety checklist, non-technical skills and technical performance) and three clinical outcome measures (length of hospital stay, complications and readmissions) before and after a 3-month staff-led development of SOPs. Process measures were evaluated by direct observation, using Oxford Non-Technical Skills II for non-technical skills and the 'glitch count' for technical performance. All staff in two orthopaedic operating theatres were trained in the principles of SOPs and then assisted to develop standardised procedures. Staff in a control operating theatre underwent the same observations but received no training. The change in difference between active and control groups was compared before and after the intervention using repeated measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: We observed 50 operations before and 55 after the intervention and analysed clinical data on 1022 and 861 operations, respectively. The staff chose to structure their efforts around revising the 'whiteboard' which documented and prompted tasks, rather than directly addressing specific task problems. Although staff preferred and sustained the new system, we found no significant differences in process or outcome measures before/after intervention in the active versus the control group. There was a secular trend towards worse outcomes in the postintervention period, seen in both active and control theatres. CONCLUSIONS: SOPs when developed and introduced by frontline staff do not necessarily improve operative processes or outcomes. The inherent tension in improvement work between giving staff ownership of improvement and maintaining control of direction needs to be managed, to ensure staff are engaged but invest energy in appropriate change.

Oxford NOTECHS II: a modified theatre team non-technical skills scoring system.

BACKGROUND: We previously developed and validated the Oxford NOTECHS rating system for evaluating the non-technical skills of an entire operating theatre team. Experience with the scale identified the need for greater discrimination between levels of performance within the normal range. We report here the development of a modified scale (Oxford NOTECHS II) to facilitate this. The new measure uses an eight-point instead of a four point scale to measure each dimension of non-technical skills, and begins with a default rating of 6 for each element. We evaluated this new scale in 297 operations at five NHS sites in four surgical specialities. Measures of theatre process reliability (glitch count) and compliance with the WHO surgical safety checklist were scored contemporaneously, and relationships with NOTECHS II scores explored. RESULTS: Mean team Oxford NOTECHS II scores was 73.39 (range 37-92). The means for surgical, anaesthetic and nursing sub-teams were 24.61 (IQR 23, 27); 24.22 (IQR 23, 26) and 24.55 (IQR 23, 26). Oxford NOTECHS II showed good inter-rater reliability between human factors and clinical observers in each of the four domains. Teams with high WHO compliance had higher mean Oxford NOTECHS II scores (74.5) than those with low compliance (71.1) (p = 0.010). We observed only a weak correlation between Oxford NOTECHS II scores and glitch count; r = -0.26 (95% CI -0.36 to -0.15). Oxford NOTECHS II scores did not vary significantly between 5 different hospital sites, but a significant difference was seen between specialities (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oxford NOTECHS II provides good discrimination between teams while retaining reliability and correlation with other measures of teamwork performance, and is not confounded by technical performance. It is therefore suitable for combined use with a technical performance scale to provide a global description of operating theatre team performance.

Is there a relationship between subacromial impingement syndrome and scapular orientation? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in scapular orientation and dynamic control, specifically involving increased anterior tilt and downward rotation, are considered to play a substantial role in contributing to a subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS). Non-surgical intervention aims at restoring normal scapular posture. The research evidence supporting this practice is equivocal. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review the relevant literature to examine whether a difference exists in scapular orientation between people without shoulder symptoms and those with SIS. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, AMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus databases were searched using relevant search terms up to August 2013. Additional studies were identified by hand-searching the reference lists of pertinent articles. REVIEW METHODS: Of the 7445 abstracts identified, 18 were selected for further analysis. Two reviewers independently assessed the studies for inclusion, data extraction and quality, using a modified Downs and Black quality assessment tool. RESULTS: 10 trials were included in the review. Scapular position was determined through two-dimensional radiological measurements, 360° inclinometers and three-dimensional motion and tracking devices. The findings were inconsistent. Some studies reported patterns of reduced upward rotation, increased anterior tilting and medial rotation of the scapula. In contrast, others reported the opposite, and some identified no difference in motion when compared to asymptomatic controls. CONCLUSIONS: The underlying aetiology of SIS is still debated. The results of this review demonstrated a lack of consistency of study methodologies and results. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support a clinical belief that the scapula adopts a common and consistent posture in SIS. This may reflect the complex, multifactorial nature of the syndrome. Additionally, it may be due to the methodological variations and shortfalls in the available research. It also raises the possibility that deviation from a 'normal' scapular position may not be contributory to SIS but part of normal variations. Further research is required to establish whether a common pattern exists in scapular kinematics in SIS patients or whether subgroups of patients with common patterns can be identified to guide management options. Non-surgical treatment involving rehabilitation of the scapula to an idealised normal posture is currently not supported by the available literature.

Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a sensitive, reliable tool for enumerating and evaluating technical process imperfections during surgical operations. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with direct observation. SETTING: Operating theatres on five sites in three National Health Service Trusts. PARTICIPANTS: Staff taking part in elective and emergency surgical procedures in orthopaedics, trauma, vascular and plastic surgery; including anaesthetists, surgeons, nurses and operating department practitioners. OUTCOME MEASURES: Reliability and validity of the glitch count method; frequency, type, temporal pattern and rate of glitches in relation to site and surgical specialty. RESULTS: The glitch count has construct and face validity, and category agreement between observers is good (κ=0.7). Redundancy between pairs of observers significantly improves the sensitivity over a single observation. In total, 429 operations were observed and 5742 glitches were recorded (mean 14 per operation, range 0-83). Specialty-specific glitch rates varied from 6.9 to 8.3/h of operating (ns). The distribution of glitch categories was strikingly similar across specialties, with distractions the commonest type in all cases. The difference in glitch rate between specialty teams operating at different sites was larger than that between specialties (range 6.3-10.5/h, p<0.001). Forty per cent of glitches occurred in the first quarter of an operation, and only 10% occurred in the final quarter. CONCLUSIONS: The glitch method allows collection of a rich dataset suitable for analysing the changes following interventions to improve process safety, and appears reliable and sensitive. Glitches occur more frequently in the early stages of an operation. Hospital environment, culture and work systems may influence the operative process more strongly than the specialty.