Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26091986›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2016

Intra-operative disruptions, surgeon's mental workload, and technical performance in a full-scale simulated procedure.

Matthias Weigl, Philipp Stefan, Kamyar Abhari, Patrick Wucherer, Pascal Fallavollita, Marc Lazarovici, Simon Weidert, Ekkehard Euler, Ken Catchpole

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Association Between Operating Room Noise and Team Cognitive Workload in Cardiac Surgery.IEEE Conference on Cognitive and Computational Aspects of Situation Management (CogSIMA) · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Matthias WeiglInstitute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Ziemssenstrasse 1, 80336, Munich, Germany. matthias.weigl@med.lmu.de.
Philipp StefanComputed Aided Medical Procedures (CAMP), Computer Science Department (I-16), Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Kamyar AbhariImaging Research Laboratories, Robarts Research Institute, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Patrick WuchererComputed Aided Medical Procedures (CAMP), Computer Science Department (I-16), Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Pascal FallavollitaComputed Aided Medical Procedures (CAMP), Computer Science Department (I-16), Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Marc LazaroviciInstitute for Emergency Medicine and Management in Medicine (INM), Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Simon WeidertDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ekkehard EulerDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ken CatchpoleSurgical Safety and Human Factors Research, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimSurgical flow disruptions occur frequently and jeopardize perioperative care and surgical performance. So far, insights into subjective and cognitive implications of intra-operative disruptions for surgeons and inherent consequences for performance are inconsistent. This study aimed to investigate the effect of surgical flow disruption on surgeon's intra-operative workload and technical performance.

methodsIn a full-scale OR simulation, 19 surgeons were randomly allocated to either of the two disruption scenarios (telephone call vs. patient discomfort). Using a mixed virtual reality simulator with a computerized, high-fidelity mannequin, all surgeons were trained in performing a vertebroplasty procedure and subsequently performed such a procedure under experimental conditions. Standardized measures on subjective workload and technical performance (trocar positioning deviation from expert-defined standard, number, and duration of X-ray acquisitions) were collected.

resultsIntra-operative workload during simulated disruption scenarios was significantly higher compared to training sessions (p < .01). Surgeons in the telephone call scenario experienced significantly more distraction compared to their colleagues in the patient discomfort scenario (p < .05). However, workload tended to be increased in surgeons who coped with distractions due to patient discomfort. Technical performance was not significantly different between both disruption scenarios. We found a significant association between surgeons' intra-operative workload and technical performance such that surgeons with increased mental workload tended to perform worse (β = .55, p = .04).

conclusionsSurgical flow disruptions affect surgeons' intra-operative workload. Increased mental workload was associated with inferior technical performance. Our simulation-based findings emphasize the need to establish smooth surgical flow which is characterized by a low level of process deviations and disruptions.

Indexed as

AttentionClinical CompetenceVertebroplastyWorkflowComputer SimulationFemaleHumansMaleManikinsSurgeonsUser-Computer InterfaceWorkloadFlow disruptionPerformanceSimulationStressSurgeryWorkload

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.