Systematic review of team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery

W. J. van der Vliet, S. M. Haenen, M. Solis-Velasco, C. H. C. Dejong, U. P. Neumann, A. J. Moser, R. M. van Dam*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

3 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

Background: Adverse events in the operating theatre related to non-technical skills and teamwork are still an issue. The influence of minimally invasive techniques on team performance and subsequent impact on patient safety remains unclear. The aim of this review was to assess the methodology used to objectify and rate team performance in minimally invasive abdominal surgery.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies on assessment of surgical team performance or non-technical skills of the surgical team in the setting of minimally invasive abdominal surgery were included. Study aim, methodology, results and conclusion were extracted for qualitative synthesis.

Results: Sixteen studies involving 677 surgical procedures were included. All studies consisted of observational case series that used heterogeneous methodologies to assess team performance and were of low methodological quality. The most commonly used team performance objectification tools were 'construct'- and 'incident'-based tools. Evidence of validity for the assessed outcome was spread widely across objectification tools, ranging from low to high. Diverse and poorly defined outcomes were reported.

Conclusion: Team demands for minimally invasive approaches to abdominal procedures remain unclear. The current literature consists of studies with heterogeneous methodology and poorly defined outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)252-259
Number of pages8
JournalBJS Open
Volume3
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2019

Keywords

  • OPERATING-ROOM
  • NONTECHNICAL SKILLS
  • ROBOTIC SURGERY
  • TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE
  • ADVERSE EVENTS
  • SAFETY
  • EFFICIENCY
  • VALIDATION
  • IMPACT
  • ERRORS

Cite this