Cargando…

Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND: Adverse events in the operating theatre related to non‐technical skills and teamwork are still an issue. The influence of minimally invasive techniques on team performance and subsequent impact on patient safety remains unclear. The aim of this review was to assess the methodology used t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Vliet, W. J., Haenen, S. M., Solis‐Velasco, M., Dejong, C. H. C., Neumann, U. P., Moser, A. J., van Dam, R. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6551413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31183440
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50133
_version_ 1783424382434017280
author van der Vliet, W. J.
Haenen, S. M.
Solis‐Velasco, M.
Dejong, C. H. C.
Neumann, U. P.
Moser, A. J.
van Dam, R. M.
author_facet van der Vliet, W. J.
Haenen, S. M.
Solis‐Velasco, M.
Dejong, C. H. C.
Neumann, U. P.
Moser, A. J.
van Dam, R. M.
author_sort van der Vliet, W. J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adverse events in the operating theatre related to non‐technical skills and teamwork are still an issue. The influence of minimally invasive techniques on team performance and subsequent impact on patient safety remains unclear. The aim of this review was to assess the methodology used to objectify and rate team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies on assessment of surgical team performance or non‐technical skills of the surgical team in the setting of minimally invasive abdominal surgery were included. Study aim, methodology, results and conclusion were extracted for qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Sixteen studies involving 677 surgical procedures were included. All studies consisted of observational case series that used heterogeneous methodologies to assess team performance and were of low methodological quality. The most commonly used team performance objectification tools were ‘construct’‐ and ‘incident’‐based tools. Evidence of validity for the assessed outcome was spread widely across objectification tools, ranging from low to high. Diverse and poorly defined outcomes were reported. CONCLUSION: Team demands for minimally invasive approaches to abdominal procedures remain unclear. The current literature consists of studies with heterogeneous methodology and poorly defined outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6551413
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65514132019-06-10 Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery van der Vliet, W. J. Haenen, S. M. Solis‐Velasco, M. Dejong, C. H. C. Neumann, U. P. Moser, A. J. van Dam, R. M. BJS Open Systematic Reviews BACKGROUND: Adverse events in the operating theatre related to non‐technical skills and teamwork are still an issue. The influence of minimally invasive techniques on team performance and subsequent impact on patient safety remains unclear. The aim of this review was to assess the methodology used to objectify and rate team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies on assessment of surgical team performance or non‐technical skills of the surgical team in the setting of minimally invasive abdominal surgery were included. Study aim, methodology, results and conclusion were extracted for qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Sixteen studies involving 677 surgical procedures were included. All studies consisted of observational case series that used heterogeneous methodologies to assess team performance and were of low methodological quality. The most commonly used team performance objectification tools were ‘construct’‐ and ‘incident’‐based tools. Evidence of validity for the assessed outcome was spread widely across objectification tools, ranging from low to high. Diverse and poorly defined outcomes were reported. CONCLUSION: Team demands for minimally invasive approaches to abdominal procedures remain unclear. The current literature consists of studies with heterogeneous methodology and poorly defined outcomes. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2019-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6551413/ /pubmed/31183440 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50133 Text en © 2019 The Authors. BJS Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Systematic Reviews
van der Vliet, W. J.
Haenen, S. M.
Solis‐Velasco, M.
Dejong, C. H. C.
Neumann, U. P.
Moser, A. J.
van Dam, R. M.
Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
title Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
title_full Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
title_fullStr Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
title_short Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
title_sort systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery
topic Systematic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6551413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31183440
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50133
work_keys_str_mv AT vandervlietwj systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery
AT haenensm systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery
AT solisvelascom systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery
AT dejongchc systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery
AT neumannup systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery
AT moseraj systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery
AT vandamrm systematicreviewofteamperformanceinminimallyinvasiveabdominalsurgery