ArticleSurgery2022
Preventable operating room delays in robotic-assisted thoracic surgery: Identifying opportunities for cost reduction.
Article in Surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Addressing Challenges Associated With Loaner Instrument Sets.AORN journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to characterize the types of intraoperative delays during robotic-assisted thoracic surgery, operating room staff awareness/perceptions of delays, and cost impact of delays on overall operative costs.
methodsRobotic-assisted thoracic surgery cases from May to August 2019 were attended by 3 third-party observers to record intraoperative delays. The postoperative surveys were given to operating room staff to elicit perceived delays. Observed versus perceived delays were compared using the McNemar test. Direct costs and charges per delay were calculated.
resultsForty-four cases were observed, of which a majority were lobectomies (n = 38 [86%]). A total of 71 delays were recorded by observers, encompassing 75% of cases (n = 33), with an average delay length of 3.6 minutes (±5.3 minutes). The following delays were observed: equipment failure (n = 40, average delay length 5.0 minutes (±6.5 minutes), equipment missing (n = 15, 2.2 minutes [±1.4 minutes]), staff unfamiliarity with equipment (n = 4, 3.4 minutes [± 1.5 minutes]), and other (n = 12, 4.5 minutes [±5.3 minutes]). The detection rates for any intraoperative delay were consistently lower for all of the operating room team members compared with observers, including surgeons (34.3% vs 77.1%; P = .0003), first assistants (41.9% vs 74.2%; P = .0075), surgical technologists (39.4% vs 72.7%; P = .0045), and circulating nurses (41.18% vs 76.47% minutes; P = .0013). The average operating room variable direct cost of delays based on the average total delay length per case was $225.52 (±$350.18) and was 1.6% (range 0-10.6%) of the total case charges.
conclusionThe lack of perception of intraoperative delays hinders operating teams from effectively closing the variable cost gaps. Future studies are needed to explore methods of increasing perception of delays and opportunities to improve operating room efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.