Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39413049›Full record

ArticleBJS open2024

Noise in the operating room coincides with surgical difficulty.

Sarah Peisl, Daniel Sánchez-Taltavull, Hugo Guillen-Ramirez, Franziska Tschan, Norbert K Semmer, Martin Hübner, Nicolas Demartines, Simon G Wrann, Stefan Gutknecht, Markus Weber and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

13 authors.

Sarah PeislDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1215-6964
Daniel Sánchez-TaltavullDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Hugo Guillen-RamirezDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Franziska TschanInstitute of Work and Organisational Psychology, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland.
Norbert K SemmerDepartment of Work and Organizational Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Martin HübnerDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nicolas DemartinesDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1530-3114
Simon G WrannDepartment of Surgery, Triemli Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
Stefan GutknechtDepartment of Surgery, Triemli Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
Markus WeberDepartment of Surgery, Triemli Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
Daniel CandinasDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Guido BeldiDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9914-3807
Sandra KellerDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

Bosch Stiftung 00906215-001Swiss National Science Foundation CR13I3_156882
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoise in the operating room has been shown to distract the surgical team and to be associated with postoperative complications. It is, however, unclear whether complications after noisy operations are the result of objective or subjective surgical difficulty or the consequence of distraction of the operating room team by noise.

methodsNoise level measurements were prospectively performed during operations in four Swiss hospitals. Objective difficulty for each operation was calculated based on surgical magnitude as suggested by the Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM), duration of operation and surgical approach. Subjective difficulty and distraction were evaluated by a questionnaire filled out by the operating room team members. Complications were assessed 30 days after surgery. Using regression analyses, the relationship between objective and subjective difficulty, distraction, intraoperative noise and postoperative complications was tested.

resultsPostoperative complications occurred after 121 (38%) of the 294 procedures included. Noise levels were significantly higher in operations that were objectively and subjectively more difficult (59.89 versus 58.35 dB(A), P < 0.001) and operations that resulted in postoperative complications (59.05 versus 58.77 dB(A), P = 0.004). Multivariable regression analyses revealed that subjective difficulty as reported by all members of the surgical team, but not distraction, was highly associated with noise and complications. Only objective surgical difficulty independently predicted noise and postoperative complications.

conclusionNoise in the operating room is a surrogate of surgical difficulty and thereby predicts postoperative complications.

Indexed as

NoiseOperating RoomsPostoperative ComplicationsAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID39413049
PMCPMC11482277

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.