Cargando…
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: Staf...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3845041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24282244 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003519 |
_version_ | 1782293277847846912 |
---|---|
author | Morgan, Lauren Robertson, Eleanor Hadi, Mohammed Catchpole, Ken Pickering, Sharon New, Steve Collins, Gary McCulloch, Peter |
author_facet | Morgan, Lauren Robertson, Eleanor Hadi, Mohammed Catchpole, Ken Pickering, Sharon New, Steve Collins, Gary McCulloch, Peter |
author_sort | Morgan, Lauren |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3845041 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38450412013-12-02 Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method Morgan, Lauren Robertson, Eleanor Hadi, Mohammed Catchpole, Ken Pickering, Sharon New, Steve Collins, Gary McCulloch, Peter BMJ Open Research Methods 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. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3845041/ /pubmed/24282244 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003519 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Research Methods Morgan, Lauren Robertson, Eleanor Hadi, Mohammed Catchpole, Ken Pickering, Sharon New, Steve Collins, Gary McCulloch, Peter Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
title | Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
title_full | Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
title_fullStr | Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
title_full_unstemmed | Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
title_short | Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
title_sort | capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method |
topic | Research Methods |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3845041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24282244 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003519 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT morganlauren capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT robertsoneleanor capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT hadimohammed capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT catchpoleken capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT pickeringsharon capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT newsteve capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT collinsgary capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod AT mccullochpeter capturingintraoperativeprocessdeviationsusingadirectobservationalapproachtheglitchmethod |