Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33844085›Full record

ReviewSurgical endoscopy2022

RAS-NOTECHS: validity and reliability of a tool for measuring non-technical skills in robotic-assisted surgery settings.

Julia Schreyer, Amelie Koch, Annika Herlemann, Armin Becker, Boris Schlenker, Ken Catchpole, Matthias Weigl

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Training and credentialing in robotic general surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A European survey on non-technical skills in robotic thoracic surgery for lung resections.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Workflow disruptions in robot-assisted surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023
    Review
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Julia SchreyerInstitute and Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Ziemssenstrasse 1, 80336, Munich, Germany. Julia.Schreyer@med.uni-muenchen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0069-911X
Amelie KochInstitute and Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Ziemssenstrasse 1, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Annika HerlemannDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Armin BeckerDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Boris SchlenkerDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ken CatchpoleDepartment of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA.
Matthias WeiglInstitute and Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Ziemssenstrasse 1, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEMedical University of South Carolina · USUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEZimmer Biomet (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

Human Factors and Systems Integration in High Technology Surgery (HF-SIgHTS)R01HS026491 · AHRQ · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI ANGER, JENNIFER TASH, CATCHPOLE, KEN · 2018 to 2022
$2.0M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS026491
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNon-technical skills (NTS) are essential for safe surgical practice as they impact workflow and patient outcomes. Observational tools to measure operating room (OR) teams' NTS have been introduced. However, there are none that account for the specific teamwork challenges introduced by robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). We set out to develop and content-validate a tool to assess multidisciplinary NTS in RAS. METHODOLOGY: Stepwise, multi-method procedure. Observations in different surgical departments and a scoping literature review were first used to compile a set of RAS-specific teamwork behaviours. This list was refined and expert validated using a Delphi consensus approach consisting of qualitative interviews and a quantitative survey. Then, RAS-specific behaviours were merged with a well-established assessment tool on OR teamwork (NOTECHS II). Finally, the new tool-RAS-NOTECHS-was applied in standardized observations of real-world procedures to test its reliability (inter-rater agreement via intra-class correlations).

resultsOur scoping review revealed 5242 articles, of which 21 were included based on pre-established inclusion criteria. We elicited 16 RAS-specific behaviours from the literature base. These were synthesized with further 18 behavioural markers (obtained from 12 OR-observations) into a list of 26 behavioural markers. This list was reviewed by seven RAS experts and condensed to 15 expert-validated RAS-specific behavioural markers which were then merged into NOTECHS II. For five observations of urologic RAS procedures (duration: 13 h and 41 min), inter-rater agreement for identification of behavioural markers was strong. Agreement of RAS-NOTECHS scores indicated moderate to strong agreement.

conclusionsRAS-NOTECHS is the first observational tool for multidisciplinary NTS in RAS. In preliminary application, it has been shown to be reliable. Since RAS is rapidly increasing and challenges for effective and safe teamwork remain at the forefront of quality and safety of surgical care, RAS-NOTECHS may contribute to training and improvement efforts in technology-facilitated surgeries.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresClinical CompetenceHumansOperating RoomsPatient Care TeamReproducibility of ResultsAssessmentDa Vinci systemHuman factorsNon-technical skillsRobotic-assisted surgerySurgical teamwork

Identifiers

PMID33844085
PMCPMC8505574
OpenAlexW3156827140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.