ArticleHealth science reports2025
The Impact of Personalised Surgical Caps on Teamwork and Communication in the Operating Room: A Systematic Review.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Communication failures in operating rooms contribute to 30% surgical errors. This systematic review evaluates whether personalized surgical caps improve teamwork and communication, addressing both clinical outcomes and professional inclusivity. Methods: We followed PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar (February 2024-April 2024). Five studies met inclusion criteria (three randomized controlled trials and two observational studies). Methodological quality was assessed using the ROB-2 tool for randomized trials and JBI checklists for observational studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity in outcome measures. Results: The review found consistent evidence that personalized surgical caps enhance communication and teamwork in the operating room. Studies reported improved name and role recognition among team members, with labeled caps reducing misidentification errors by 65%-78%. Notably, female and underrepresented minority staff experienced disproportionately greater benefits, including higher rates of role recognition and reduced microaggressions. Teamwork perceptions improved significantly in three studies, with one pilot study documenting a median score increase of 1-2 points. However, the magnitude of effects varied across professional roles, suggesting contextual influences. Conclusion: Personalized surgical caps demonstrate promise for improving communication dynamics and fostering inclusivity in the operating room, particularly for marginalized groups. While the evidence base is limited by study heterogeneity, all included studies reported positive outcomes. Future implementation should account for institutional policies and staff preferences to maximize effectiveness. Further research with standardized outcome measures is needed to strengthen these findings.
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.