Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32865281›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical practice2021

Long-term effects of perioperative briefing and debriefing on team climate: A mixed-method evaluation study.

Meilin Schaap, Mirelle Hanskamp-Sebregts, Thijs M A W Merkx, Anita A J Heideveld-Chevalking, Jeroen W J H J Meijerink

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07396675 (Improving Postoperative Debriefings), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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.

NCT07396675 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Improving Postoperative Debriefings: the Added Value of Operating Room Black Box Supported Debriefings and Their Effect on Healthcare Professionals Perceived Effectiveness and Psychological Safety.

TypeinterventionalSponsorORNND - Operating Room Nurse Network DenmarkRan2026 to 2027Enrolled135ConditionsStress, Resilience, Psychological Safety, Burnout, Healthcare WorkersArmsDebriefing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Meilin SchaapBiomedical Sciences, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mirelle Hanskamp-SebregtsInstitute of Quality Assurance and Patient Safety, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5415-254X
Thijs M A W MerkxDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Anita A J Heideveld-ChevalkingDepartment of Operating Rooms, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7702-3209
Jeroen W J H J MeijerinkDepartment of Operating Rooms, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0210-073X
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo evaluate the long-term (5 years) effects of perioperative briefing and debriefing on team climate. We explored the barriers and facilitators of the performance of perioperative briefing and debriefing to explain its effects on team climate and to make recommendations for further improvement of surgical safety tools.

methodsA mixed-method evaluation study was carried out amongst surgical staff at a tertiary care university hospital with 593-bed capacity in the Netherlands. Thirteen surgical teams were included. Team climate inventory and a standardised evaluation questionnaire were used to measure team climate (primary outcome) and experiences with perioperative briefing and debriefing (secondary outcome), respectively. Thirteen surgical team members participated in a semi-structured interview to explore barriers and facilitators of the performance of perioperative briefing and debriefing.

resultsThe dimension "participative safety" increased significantly 5 years after the implementation of perioperative briefing and debriefing (P = .02 (95% confidence interval 1.18-9.25)). Perioperative briefing and debriefing were considered a useful method for improving and sustaining participative safety and cooperation within surgical teams. The positive aspects of briefing were that shared agreements made at the start of the day and that briefing enabled participants to work as a team. Participants were less satisfied regarding debriefing, mostly because of the lack of a sense of urgency and a lack of a safe culture for feedback. Briefing and debriefing had less influence on efficiency.

conclusionsAlthough perioperative briefing and debriefing improve participative safety, the intervention will become more effective for maintaining team climate when teams are complete, irrelevant questions are substituted by customised ones and when there is a safer culture for feedback.

Indexed as

Patient Care TeamFeedbackHumansNetherlands

Identifiers

PMID32865281
PMCPMC7988591
OpenAlexW3082811131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.