Cargando…

Quality of Communication in Robotic Surgery and Surgical Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Robotic surgery has introduced unique challenges to surgical workflow. The association between quality of communication in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery and surgical outcomes was evaluated. METHODS: After each gynecologic robotic surgery, the team members involved...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schiff, Lauren, Tsafrir, Ziv, Aoun, Joelle, Taylor, Andrew, Theoharis, Evan, Eisenstein, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4949353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27493469
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2016.00026
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Robotic surgery has introduced unique challenges to surgical workflow. The association between quality of communication in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery and surgical outcomes was evaluated. METHODS: After each gynecologic robotic surgery, the team members involved in the surgery completed a survey regarding the quality of communication. A composite quality-of-communication score was developed using principal component analysis. A higher composite quality-of-communication score signified poor communication. Objective parameters, such as operative time and estimated blood loss (EBL), were gathered from the patient's medical record and correlated with the composite quality-of-communication scores. RESULTS: Forty robotic cases from March through May 2013 were included. Thirty-two participants including surgeons, circulating nurses, and surgical technicians participated in the study. A higher composite quality-of-communication score was associated with greater EBL (P = .010) and longer operative time (P = .045), after adjustment for body mass index, prior major abdominal surgery, and uterine weight. Specifically, for every 1-SD increase in the perceived lack of communication, there was an additional 51 mL EBL and a 31-min increase in operative time. The most common reasons reported for poor communication in the operating room were noise level (28/36, 78%) and console-to-bedside communication problems (23/36, 64%). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a significant association between poor intraoperative team communication and worse surgical outcomes in robotic gynecologic surgery. Employing strategies to decrease extraneous room noise, improve console-to-bedside communication and team training may have a positive impact on communication and related surgical outcomes.