Literature DB >> 17142591

A theory-based instrument to evaluate team communication in the operating room: balancing measurement authenticity and reliability.

Lorelei Lingard1, Glenn Regehr, Sherry Espin, Sarah Whyte.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breakdown in communication among members of the healthcare team threatens the effective delivery of health services, and raises the risk of errors and adverse events. AIM: To describe the process of developing an authentic, theory-based evaluation instrument that measures communication among members of the operating room team by documenting communication failures.
METHODS: 25 procedures were viewed by 3 observers observing in pairs, and records of events on each communication failure observed were independently completed by each observer. Each record included the type and outcome of the failure (both selected from a checklist of options), as well as the time of occurrence and a description of the event. For each observer, records of events were compiled to create a profile for the procedure.
RESULTS: At the level of identifying events in the procedure, mean inter-rater agreement was low (mean agreement across pairs 47.3%). However, inter-rater reliability regarding the total number of communication failures per procedure was reasonable (mean ICC across pairs 0.72). When observers recorded the same event, a strong concordance about the type of communication failure represented by the event was found. DISCUSSION: Reasonable inter-rater reliability was shown by the instrument in assessing the relative rate of communication failures displayed per procedure. The difficulties in identifying and interpreting individual communication events reflect the delicate balance between increased subtlety and increased error. Complex team communication does not readily reduce to mere observation of events; some level of interpretation is required to meaningfully account for communicative exchanges. Although such observer interpretation improves the subtlety and validity of the instrument, it necessarily introduces error, reducing reliability. Although we continue to work towards increasing the instrument's sensitivity at the level of individual categories, this study suggests that the instrument could be used to measure the effect of team communication intervention on overall failure rates at the level of procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17142591      PMCID: PMC2464881          DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2005.015388

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care        ISSN: 1475-3898


  11 in total

1.  Team communications in the operating room: talk patterns, sites of tension, and implications for novices.

Authors:  Lorelei Lingard; Richard Reznick; Sherry Espin; Glenn Regehr; Isabella DeVito
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.893

2.  Multidisciplinary teamwork: the good, bad, and everything in between.

Authors:  J Firth-Cozens
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-06

3.  Gaining cooperation among members of hospital project teams.

Authors:  M B Pinto
Journal:  Hosp Top       Date:  1990

4.  Forming professional identities on the health care team: discursive constructions of the 'other' in the operating room.

Authors:  L Lingard; R Reznick; I DeVito; S Espin
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 6.251

5.  Organizational assessment in intensive care units (ICUs): construct development, reliability, and validity of the ICU nurse-physician questionnaire.

Authors:  S M Shortell; D M Rousseau; R R Gillies; K J Devers; T L Simons
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals.

Authors:  Atul A Gawande; Michael J Zinner; David M Studdert; Troyen A Brennan
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  Best practices for managing surgical services: the role of coordination.

Authors:  G J Young; M P Charns; J Daley; M G Forbes; W Henderson; S F Khuri
Journal:  Health Care Manage Rev       Date:  1997

8.  Getting teams to talk: development and pilot implementation of a checklist to promote interprofessional communication in the OR.

Authors:  L Lingard; S Espin; B Rubin; S Whyte; M Colmenares; G R Baker; D Doran; E Grober; B Orser; J Bohnen; R Reznick
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-10

9.  Anaesthetists' attitudes to teamwork and safety.

Authors:  R Flin; G Fletcher; P McGeorge; A Sutherland; R Patey
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 6.955

10.  Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects.

Authors:  L Lingard; S Espin; S Whyte; G Regehr; G R Baker; R Reznick; J Bohnen; B Orser; D Doran; E Grober
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2004-10
View more
  11 in total

1.  Deconstructing intraoperative communication failures.

Authors:  Yue-Yung Hu; Alexander F Arriaga; Sarah E Peyre; Katherine A Corso; Emilie M Roth; Caprice C Greenberg
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2012-05-04       Impact factor: 2.192

2.  Using Incident Reports to Assess Communication Failures and Patient Outcomes.

Authors:  Elizabeth Umberfield; Amir A Ghaferi; Sarah L Krein; Milisa Manojlovich
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2019-03-29

3.  Development and implementation of the Structured Training Trainer Assessment Report (STTAR) in the English National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Susannah M Wyles; Danilo Miskovic; Zhifang Ni; Ara W Darzi; Roland M Valori; Mark G Coleman; George B Hanna
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Framework for direct observation of performance and safety in healthcare.

Authors:  Ken Catchpole; David M Neyens; James Abernathy; David Allison; Anjali Joseph; Scott T Reeves
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2017-09-28       Impact factor: 7.035

5.  Detection of medical errors in kidney transplantation: a pilot study comparing proactive clinician debriefings to a hospital-wide incident reporting system.

Authors:  Lisa M McElroy; Amna Daud; Brittany Lapin; Olivia Ross; Donna M Woods; Anton I Skaro; Jane L Holl; Daniela P Ladner
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Development and evaluation of an observational tool for assessing surgical flow disruptions and their impact on surgical performance.

Authors:  Sarah E Henrickson Parker; Aaron A Laviana; Rishi K Wadhera; Douglas A Wiegmann; Thoralf M Sundt
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Standards of resuscitation during inter-hospital transportation: the effects of structured team briefing or guideline review - a randomised, controlled simulation study of two micro-interventions.

Authors:  Christian B Høyer; Erika F Christensen; Berit Eika
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  Correlates of non-technical skills in surgery: a prospective study.

Authors:  Brigid M Gillespie; Emma Harbeck; Evelyn Kang; Catherine Steel; Nicole Fairweather; Wendy Chaboyer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Does your discussion realize its potential?

Authors:  Lorelei Lingard
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2017-10

10.  Surgical flow disturbances in dedicated minimally invasive surgery suites: an observational study to assess its supposed superiority over conventional suites.

Authors:  Mathijs D Blikkendaal; Sara R C Driessen; Sharon P Rodrigues; Johann P T Rhemrev; Maddy J G H Smeets; Jenny Dankelman; John J van den Dobbelsteen; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.