Cargando…
Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety
OBJECTIVE: To understand human factors (HF) contributing to disturbances during invasive cardiac procedures, including frequency and nature of distractions, and assessment of operator workload. METHODS: Single centre prospective observational evaluation of 194 cardiac procedures in three adult cardi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7713203/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33268470 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2020-001260 |
_version_ | 1783618535252033536 |
---|---|
author | Mahadevan, Kalaivani Cowan, Elena Kalsi, Navneet Bolam, Helena Arnett, Richard Hobson, Alex Guha, Kaushik Morton, Geraint Brennan, Peter A Kalra, Paul R |
author_facet | Mahadevan, Kalaivani Cowan, Elena Kalsi, Navneet Bolam, Helena Arnett, Richard Hobson, Alex Guha, Kaushik Morton, Geraint Brennan, Peter A Kalra, Paul R |
author_sort | Mahadevan, Kalaivani |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To understand human factors (HF) contributing to disturbances during invasive cardiac procedures, including frequency and nature of distractions, and assessment of operator workload. METHODS: Single centre prospective observational evaluation of 194 cardiac procedures in three adult cardiac catheterisation laboratories over 6 weeks. A proforma including frequency, nature, magnitude and level of procedural risk at the time of each distraction/interruption was completed for each case. The primary operator completed a National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) task load questionnaire rating mental/physical effort, level of frustration, time-urgency, and overall effort and performance. RESULTS: 264 distractions occurred in 106 (55%) out of 194 procedures observed; 80% were not relevant to the case being undertaken; 14% were urgent including discussions of potential ST-elevation myocardial infarction requiring emergency angioplasty. In procedures where distractions were observed, frequency per case ranged from 1 to 16 (mean 2.5, SD ±2.2); 43 were documented during high-risk stages of the procedure. Operator rating of NASA task load parameters demonstrated higher levels of mental and physical workload and effort during cases in which distractions occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In this first description of HF in adult cardiac catheter laboratories, we found that fewer than half of all procedures were completed without interruption/distraction. The majority were unnecessary and without relation to the case or list. We propose the introduction of a ‘sterile cockpit’ environment within catheter laboratories, as adapted from aviation and used in surgical operating theatres, to minimise non-emergent interruptions and disturbances, to improve operator conditions and overall patient safety. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7713203 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77132032020-12-04 Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety Mahadevan, Kalaivani Cowan, Elena Kalsi, Navneet Bolam, Helena Arnett, Richard Hobson, Alex Guha, Kaushik Morton, Geraint Brennan, Peter A Kalra, Paul R Open Heart Health Care Delivery, Economics and Global Health Care OBJECTIVE: To understand human factors (HF) contributing to disturbances during invasive cardiac procedures, including frequency and nature of distractions, and assessment of operator workload. METHODS: Single centre prospective observational evaluation of 194 cardiac procedures in three adult cardiac catheterisation laboratories over 6 weeks. A proforma including frequency, nature, magnitude and level of procedural risk at the time of each distraction/interruption was completed for each case. The primary operator completed a National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) task load questionnaire rating mental/physical effort, level of frustration, time-urgency, and overall effort and performance. RESULTS: 264 distractions occurred in 106 (55%) out of 194 procedures observed; 80% were not relevant to the case being undertaken; 14% were urgent including discussions of potential ST-elevation myocardial infarction requiring emergency angioplasty. In procedures where distractions were observed, frequency per case ranged from 1 to 16 (mean 2.5, SD ±2.2); 43 were documented during high-risk stages of the procedure. Operator rating of NASA task load parameters demonstrated higher levels of mental and physical workload and effort during cases in which distractions occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In this first description of HF in adult cardiac catheter laboratories, we found that fewer than half of all procedures were completed without interruption/distraction. The majority were unnecessary and without relation to the case or list. We propose the introduction of a ‘sterile cockpit’ environment within catheter laboratories, as adapted from aviation and used in surgical operating theatres, to minimise non-emergent interruptions and disturbances, to improve operator conditions and overall patient safety. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7713203/ /pubmed/33268470 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2020-001260 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) 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, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Health Care Delivery, Economics and Global Health Care Mahadevan, Kalaivani Cowan, Elena Kalsi, Navneet Bolam, Helena Arnett, Richard Hobson, Alex Guha, Kaushik Morton, Geraint Brennan, Peter A Kalra, Paul R Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
title | Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
title_full | Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
title_fullStr | Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
title_full_unstemmed | Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
title_short | Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
title_sort | distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety |
topic | Health Care Delivery, Economics and Global Health Care |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7713203/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33268470 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2020-001260 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mahadevankalaivani distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT cowanelena distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT kalsinavneet distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT bolamhelena distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT arnettrichard distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT hobsonalex distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT guhakaushik distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT mortongeraint distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT brennanpetera distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety AT kalrapaulr distractionsinthecardiaccatheterisationlaboratoryimpactforcardiologistsandpatientsafety |