ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Speech communication interference in the robotic operating room.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noise levels in tele-operated robotic-assisted surgery-a phase-based analysis.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Miscommunication in the OR is a threat to patient safety and surgical efficiency. Our objective was to measure the frequency and causes of communication interference between robotic team members. We observed 78 robotic surgeries over 215 h. 65.4% were General Surgery, most commonly cholecystectomy, identifying Speech Communication Interference (SCI) events, defined as "surgery-related group discourse that is disrupted according to the goals of the communication or the physical and situational context of the exchange". We noted the causes and strategies to correct the miscommunication, near misses, and case delays associated with each SCI event. Post-surgery interviews supported observations and were analyzed thematically. Overall, we observed 687 SCI events (mean 8.8 ± 6.5 per case, 3.2 per hour), ranging from one to 28 per case. 48 (7.0%) occurred during docking and 136 (19.8%) occurred during a critical moment. The most common causes were concurrent tasks (66.1%); loud noises (10.8%) from patient cart, lightbox fan, and suction machine; and overlapping conversations (4.2%). 94.8% resulted in a case delay. These events distracted from monitoring patient safety and resulted in near misses. Mitigating strategies included leaning out of the surgeon console to repeat the message and employing a messenger. These findings help characterize miscommunication in robotic surgery. Possible interventions include microphones and headsets, positioning the surgeon console closer to the bedside, moving loud equipment further away, and upgrading the patient cart speaker.
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.