Falisha Kanji1, Ken Catchpole2, Eunice Choi1, Myrtede Alfred2, Kate Cohen3, Daniel Shouhed1, Jennifer Anger1, Tara Cohen4. 1. Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd Suite 8215NT, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA. 2. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 3. Enterprise Information Services, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd Suite 8215NT, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA. Tara.cohen@cshs.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The introduction of a robot into the surgical suite changes the dynamics of the work-system, creating new opportunities for both success and failure. An extensive amount of research has identified a range of barriers to safety and efficiency in Robotic Assisted Surgery (RAS), such as communication breakdowns, coordination failures, equipment issues, and technological malfunctions. However, there exists very few solutions to these barriers. The purpose of this review was to identify the gap between identified RAS work-system barriers and interventions developed to address those barriers. METHODS: A search from three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline) was conducted for literature discussing system-level interventions for RAS that were published between January 1, 1985 to March 17, 2020. Articles describing interventions for systems-level issues that did not involve technical skills in RAS were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 30 articles were included in the review. Only seven articles (23.33%) implemented and evaluated interventions, while the remaining 23 articles (76.67%) provided suggested interventions for issues in RAS. Major barriers identified included disruptions, ergonomic issues, safety and efficiency, communication, and non-technical skills. Common solutions involved team training, checklist development, and workspace redesign. CONCLUSION: The review identified a significant gap between issues and solutions in RAS. While it is important to continue identifying how the complexities of RAS affect operating room (OR) and team dynamics, future work will need to address existing issues with interventions that have been tested and evaluated. In particular, improving RAS-associated non-technical skills, task management, and technology management may lead to improved OR dynamics associated with greater efficiency, reduced costs, and better systems-level outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The introduction of a robot into the surgical suite changes the dynamics of the work-system, creating new opportunities for both success and failure. An extensive amount of research has identified a range of barriers to safety and efficiency in Robotic Assisted Surgery (RAS), such as communication breakdowns, coordination failures, equipment issues, and technological malfunctions. However, there exists very few solutions to these barriers. The purpose of this review was to identify the gap between identified RAS work-system barriers and interventions developed to address those barriers. METHODS: A search from three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline) was conducted for literature discussing system-level interventions for RAS that were published between January 1, 1985 to March 17, 2020. Articles describing interventions for systems-level issues that did not involve technical skills in RAS were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 30 articles were included in the review. Only seven articles (23.33%) implemented and evaluated interventions, while the remaining 23 articles (76.67%) provided suggested interventions for issues in RAS. Major barriers identified included disruptions, ergonomic issues, safety and efficiency, communication, and non-technical skills. Common solutions involved team training, checklist development, and workspace redesign. CONCLUSION: The review identified a significant gap between issues and solutions in RAS. While it is important to continue identifying how the complexities of RAS affect operating room (OR) and team dynamics, future work will need to address existing issues with interventions that have been tested and evaluated. In particular, improving RAS-associated non-technical skills, task management, and technology management may lead to improved OR dynamics associated with greater efficiency, reduced costs, and better systems-level outcomes.
Keywords:
Checklists; Communication; Human factors; Simulation; Team training
Authors: Priyanka Gupta; John Schomburg; Suprita Krishna; Oluwakayode Adejoro; Qi Wang; Benjamin Marsh; Andrew Nguyen; Juan Reyes Genere; Patrick Self; Erik Lund; Badrinath R Konety Journal: J Endourol Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Ken R Catchpole; Elyse Hallett; Sam Curtis; Tannaz Mirchi; Colby P Souders; Jennifer T Anger Journal: Ergonomics Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Monica Jain; Brian T Fry; Luke W Hess; Jennifer T Anger; Bruce L Gewertz; Ken Catchpole Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2016-07-04 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Jennifer T Anger; Elizabeth R Mueller; Christopher Tarnay; Bridget Smith; Kevin Stroupe; Amy Rosenman; Linda Brubaker; Catherine Bresee; Kimberly Kenton Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Judith Tiferes; Ahmed A Hussein; Ann Bisantz; Justen D Kozlowski; Mohamed A Sharif; Nathalie M Winder; Nabeeha Ahmad; Jenna Allers; Lora Cavuoto; Khurshid A Guru Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2016 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Nabeeha Ahmad; Ahmed A Hussein; Lora Cavuoto; Mohamed Sharif; Jenna C Allers; Nobuyuki Hinata; Basel Ahmad; Justen D Kozlowski; Zishan Hashmi; Ann Bisantz; Khurshid A Guru Journal: BJU Int Date: 2016-02-21 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Ken Catchpole; Colby Perkins; Catherine Bresee; M Jonathon Solnik; Benjamin Sherman; John Fritch; Bruno Gross; Samantha Jagannathan; Niv Hakami-Majd; Raymund Avenido; Jennifer T Anger Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ryan N Hansen; Basil Matthew Saour; Brian Serafini; Blake Hannaford; Lanu Kim; Takayoshi Kohno; Ryan James; Wayne Monsky; Stephen P Seslar Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2021-11-19 Impact factor: 5.033