Abstract
Communication and team dynamics have been widely accepted as pillars of safety in the operating room setting and beyond, yet institutions still struggle with establishing a culture of safety that promotes these skills. Team training programs, prompted conversations embedded within workflows, and cognitive aids such as checklists can enhance communication and promote these non-technical skills. In this review, we describe the importance of non-technical skills in preventing patient harm and provide an overview of team training programs and checklists as methods to enhance patient safety.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
There are now more than four decades of literature on adverse events in medicine, but it is only in the past two decades that using these results to guide quality improvements and research efforts has been actively appreciated. The first large scale study of iatrogenesis was performed in the early 1970s, when the California Medical Association reviewed nearly 21,000 hospital admissions in the states of Colorado and Utah and found that the adverse event rate in medicine occurred 4.6% of the time [1]. In 1991, the Harvard Medical Practice Study analyzed 30,000 admission hospital records in the state of New York and found the adverse event incidence rate to be 3.7% [2, 3]. In both of these studies, over half of the adverse events resulted from medical errors that were preventable, and over half to 2/3 of these events were attributable to surgical care alone, stressing the importance of targeting and improving team dynamics in the operating room [4, 5].
In 1999, the Institute Of Medicine published the first public report on medical error in its manuscript, To Err is Human [6]. This raised public awareness about performance and quality outcomes in medicine. The authors estimated that among the over 33.6 million admissions to US hospitals in 1997, at least 44,000 to 98,000 deaths were due to medical errors, with communication failures identified as the leading cause of preventable medical errors. Two years later, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published that in 1997, medical errors were the eighth leading cause of death, which was more than motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS. The total national costs including lost income, lost household production, disability, and health care costs of preventable medical errors resulting in injury were estimated to be between 17 and 29 billion dollars. A recent report suggests that medical errors are now the third leading cause of death in the USA [7••].
These and other studies instigated a swing in focus away from medical malpractice examinations after events occur, to studying how to prevent occurrences of adverse events in the first place. Government task forces were assembled to tackle these issues. The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other federal agencies formed the Quality Interagency Coordination Task Force and issued a plan for reducing medical errors. In 2001, former HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson announced the creation of a Patient Safety Task Force to coordinate a joint effort to improve data collection on patient safety. The lead agencies on this task force are the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the CDC, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services (CMS), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).
Technological advancements and efforts towards targeted quality improvement have evolved harmoniously with each other to produce advances for surgical techniques and anesthetic practices that have greatly reduced the morbidity and mortality of even complex operations. Yet, despite this evolution of expertise, patients still experience preventable harm, and much of this harm comes from distractions and suboptimal team dynamics, rather than technical shortcomings or failures. Strategies such as checklists and team training programs are therefore valuable in minimizing or even eliminating preventable mistakes.
Team Training Programs
There is a well-established body of literature that supports the use of team-based training programs and systems to improve medical outcomes. Although team dynamics and communication are recognized as vital components to safe patient care, few studies confirm the use of team-based systems to achieve this in the perioperative arena. Most of this information was first identified and published in the realms of business, aviation, and the military. There are different training programs available, and even culturally hierarchical and once rigid team environments such as those commonly seen in the operative setting are now understanding the need for improving communication and team dynamics to improve patient safety [8,9,10,11,12,13].
The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented a formalized medical team training program for operating room personnel on a national level. The program entailed the implementation of briefings, debriefings, and checklists in the operating room. Team training activities consisted of teaching over 2 months, a 1-day in-person conference, and four quarterly coaching interviews. Data was retrospectively obtained from the VHA surgical quality improvement project (VASQIP) from 2006 to 2008 and represented 182,409 procedures from 108 VHA facilities. Seventy-four facilities exposed to the team training program were compared to 34 facilities that had not undergone training. The risk-adjusted surgical mortality rate was 50% less in the trained group than in the untrained group. Interestingly, there seemed to be a dose-response relationship, with a reduction of 0.5 deaths per 1000 procedures for each subsequent quarter following the intervention (p = 0.001). This large and well-designed study provides strong evidence for the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention consisting of medical team training, ongoing coaching, and checklists to trigger operating room briefings and debriefings. Moreover, this study demonstrated that patient safety studies can be robustly designed and adequately powered to detect changes in mortality. The investigators used a multiple time-series design with concurrent control, accounted for selection bias using propensity score matching and included an elegant dose-response analysis [14].
One widely used team training program with government funding is Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety, or TeamSTEPPS® (TS) [15, 16•, 17,18,19,20]. This evidence-based teamwork program, developed by the Department of Defense and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) in 2006, is aimed at optimizing patient care by improving communication and teamwork skills among health care professionals. The program is based on over 20 years of research on team building and quality outcomes from the military, aviation, nuclear power, business, and medicine and is organized into four core competencies: team leadership, situational monitoring, mutual support, and communication. The TS mascot is a penguin from the book Our Iceberg is Melting [21], which metaphorically describes an eight-step change management strategy that teaches how complex organizations can face and solve challenges as a team. The book became popular in the business world and earned media headlines. This is important to recognize because the educational content in any training program alone will not make the program successful. Team training programs must be accompanied by a formal and dedicated rollout, continued coaching, and leadership support in order to be successful.
Several successful interventions using TS have been described in the literature. For example, one study showing team training success was described in an obstetrics department in Boston that saw a 47% decrease in adverse outcomes for pre-term infants and a 50% reduction in malpractice claims over the subsequent 3 years following the implementation of TS [22]. A study in Nebraska rolled out TS over 2 months to all operating room staff including operating room technicians, nurses, anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists, surgeons, and medical residents. A before and after team training comparison was associated with improvement in first case start times and Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP)-defined process measures related to deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis, beta blocker administration, and antibiotic administration. Most importantly, the investigators found statistically significant improvements in morbidity and surgical mortality. As is common with many quality initiatives, the investigators also describe worsening results after 1 year of training, which suggests the need for sustainability plans and continuous reinforcement [23].
While there is no ideal training program or methodology, several—including those referenced in this manuscript—have been described in detail. Institutions have taken portions of training programs they found most relevant to their environments and launched in piecemeal. It is important to note that inadequate implementation has been recognized as a barrier to success given the challenges with implementing comprehensive team training programs such as TS [24].
The active perception that teamwork is linked to outcomes is becoming more mainstream. A group in Denmark interviewed 21 participants from four different thoracic surgery centers. Respondents viewed a shared mental model, planning and preparation, and understanding the status of current resources as an important part of patient safety [25]. These perceptions are not always consistent across disciplines, and an understanding of the different perspectives of all team members is important to establishing proficient team dynamics. For example, a safety culture study found that surgery-attending physicians perceived their safety climate to be strong, but nurses and surgical technicians perceived significantly worse safety climates. A review of disruptive behavior found that fewer than 10% of clinicians display disruptive behavior; however, up to 98% of clinicians report witnessing disruptive behavior, and 36% report being bullied. The authors describe the importance of looking at one’s own performance and recognizing self-responsibility and respecting the perceptions of others as a start to better understanding unconscious biases and improving team dynamics [26].
Surgical Safety Checklists
Safety checklists work by reducing communication failures and promoting collaborative team dynamics. Implementation of these communication tools has been shown to reduce mortality and surgical complications [27]. A commonly used one is the Surgical Safety Checklist (SCC), which was widely promoted by the World Health Organization starting in 2008. Many variations of this checklist exist, as institutions and service lines have modified the document to meet their specific needs.
The World Health Organization’s (WHO) checklist study, performed as part of the WHO’s Safe Surgery Saves Lives campaign, was conducted between 2007 and 2008 at eight hospitals in eight cities across the world including Toronto, Canada; Auckland, New Zealand; London, England; and Seattle, Washington in the USA. Data from 3733 consecutively enrolled patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery was prospectively collected before implementation of the checklist and compared to 3955 consecutively enrolled patients following the introduction of the surgical safety checklist. They found statistically significant reductions in in-hospital death (up to 30 days) (p = 0.003), inpatient complications (p < 0.001), surgical site infection, and return to operating room following the introduction of the checklist. Subsequent studies have validated the potential for improving patient safety using checklists [28].
A 13-month prospective study looking at outcomes before and after implementation of a surgical briefing checklist focused on communication failures (late, inaccurate, unresolved, or exclusive communication) as the outcome. The number of communication failures per procedure declined following the intervention (p < .001). Practitioners identified that 34% of the briefings demonstrated utility specifically around identification of problems, resolution of critical knowledge gaps, decision-making, and follow-up actions. More importantly, the number of communication failures that was associated with at least one visible negative consequence declined by 64% [29].
There are several other examples of improved patient safety in the perioperative period associated with the use of checklists to improve patient care. For instance, a prospective cohort study in a 16-bed surgical oncology intensive care unit where investigators implemented a “daily goals” sheet found that the number of residents and nurses who understood the goals of patient care increased from 10 to 95%, and the average ICU length of stay decreased from 2.2 to 1.1 days following the intervention [30]. More recently, the use of the WHO trauma checklist in 11 centers showed improvements in several process measures including the chance of having an abdominal examination, chest auscultation, and distal pulse examination [31•].
The use of a checklist was found in one study to be perceived positively by patients during awake cesarean sections [32], but the existence of a checklist in and of itself is not sufficient to produce outcome improvements. Although checklists provide a structured conversation within the workflow and can prompt discussions about important information, they are only successful if providers engage in these safety conversations properly. One single center report described a negative result after revising their surgical safety checklist and measuring post-intervention performance of the checklists as well as safety climate. The investigators identified an insufficiently structured rollout and inefficient implementation as the likely reasons for the ineffectiveness of the intervention. Adequate implementation of a surgical safety checklist is resource intensive and includes coaches, audits, and continued feedback. Any study that reports 100% compliance with a checklist should be looked upon with caution, because the proper use of a checklist requires active engagement, relevant conversation, and participation of the necessary team players rather than merely “checking the boxes” [33,34,35].
Measuring and Improving Non-technical Skills
Recognizing the importance of teamwork and communication skills suggests the need for a metric to assess the status and progress of practitioner performance for these skills. The Anesthetists’ Non-Technical Skills system, the Ottawa Global Rating Scale, the Trauma Management Skills scoring system, the non-technical skills assessment, and the Crisis Resource Management checklist may be used to evaluate teamwork, leadership, situation awareness, and other behaviors that contribute to safe and efficient task performance. These tools are typically used to evaluate trainees during simulated scenarios. Team training and non-technical skills assessment tools should be incorporated into resident training in order to establish the importance of their application early on in a physician’s career [36].
Simulation has traditionally been used to help trainees acquire technical skills, but it can also be used to successfully teach team building [37,38,39,40]. The ability to simulate an operating room environment provides opportunities to practice non-technical skills under supervision. For example, trainees may serve in the role of an operating room manager, which may help them improve non-technical and leadership skills [41]. Additionally, senior members of departments can serve as role models for junior attendings and trainees to emphasize the importance of non-technical skills [42]. One investigation used a multidisciplinary operating room simulation program implemented nationally throughout New Zealand to tech team training. The intervention showed long-lasting effects on reported attitudes and behaviors in clinical practice, reflecting improved communication and teamwork [43].
Non-technical skills are being recognized by all stakeholders as important targets for quality improvement interventions. For example, payers have partnered with hospitals to develop programs that include team training for their staff. An example of such partnership is the Federation of Jewish Philanthropists (FOJP) corporation in New York City, which partnered with Mount Sinai Medical Center to develop safety conversations and team training [44]. The Massachusetts-based insurance company CRICO collaborated with four Harvard-affiliated hospitals to develop a team training curriculum and surgical safety checklist initiative [45].
Summary and Conclusions
Reducing medical error has become the cornerstone of modern healthcare. Hospitals are motivated by their responsibility to prevent patient harm, more transparency with publically reported data, and reimbursements tied to quality outcomes. Failures of communication and team-based dynamics play a crucial role in preventing medical errors. Thus, we must realign our thinking to dedicate teaching and resources to develop providers’ non-technical skills in addition to knowledge and technical expertise. Team training and checklists, when properly implemented, have been shown to improve important outcomes such as mortality and major morbidity. As hospitals and safety organizations strive to find innovative ways to promote a culture of safety, each hospital’s climate requires structured solutions that fit the workflow and culture of its environment. Thus, hospitals must explore the different available options and choose those tools that would be most effective in their own situations as we move forward towards reducing preventable error in medicine.
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Mills DH. Medical insurance feasibility study: a technical summary. West J Med. 1978;128:360–5.
Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:370–6.
Leape LL, Brennan A, Laird NM, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:377–84.
Barbeito A, Lau WT, Weitzel N, et al. FOCUS: the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists’ initiative to improve quality and safety in the cardiovascular operating room. Anesth Analg. 2014 Oct;119(4):777–83.
Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery. 2003;133(6):614–21. https://doi.org/10.1067/msy.2003.169.
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2000.
•• Makary MA, Daniel M. Medical error—the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ. 2016;3(353):i2139. Medical errors are fast becoming recognized as a significant cause of death and morbidity which is driving efforts to improve communication and team dynamics to prevent error.
Tsuburaya A, Soma T, Yoshikawa T, et al. Introduction of the non-technical skills for surgeons (NOTSS) system in a Japanese cancer center. Surg Today. 2016;46(12):1451–5.
Frasier LL, Pavuluri Quamme SR, Becker A, et al. Investigating teamwork in the operating room: engaging stakeholders and setting the agenda. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(1):109–11.
Singer SJ, Molina G, Li Z, et al. Relationship between operating room teamwork, contextual factors, and safety checklist performance. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;223(4):568–580.e2.
Wheelock A, Suliman A, Wharton R, et al. The impact of operating room distractions on stress, workload, and teamwork. Ann Surg. 2015;261(6):1079–84.
Berkow LC. Anesthetic management and human factors in the intraoperative MRI environment. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2016;29(5):563–7.
Young-Xu Y, Neily J, Mills PD, et al. Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical morbidity. Arch Surg. 2011;146(12):1368. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2011.762.
Neily J, Mills PD, Young-Xu Y, et al. Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical mortality. J Am Med Assoc. 2010;304(15):1693–700. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1506.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); United States Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs); TRICARE Management Activity. TeamSTEPPS: Team Strategies & Tools to Enhance Performance & Patient Safety—instructor guide. Rockville, MD: AHRQ publication; no. 06-0020-0; 2006.
• Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). TeamSTEPPS 2.0—TeamSTEPPS Implementation Guide. http://www.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/professionals/education/curriculum-tools/teamstepps/instructor/essentials/implguide.pdf. Published 2014. Accessed January 1, 2016. In this website, one can download materials free of charge to teach teamwork skills with. Educational materials as well as implementation plans are available.
Fischer MM, Tubb CC, Brennan JA, et al. Implementation of TeamSTEPPS at a level-1 Military Trauma Center: the San Antonio Military Medical Center experience. US Army Med Dep J. 2015:75-9.
Weld LR, Stringer MT, Ebertowski JS, et al. TeamSTEPPS improves operating room efficiency and patient safety. Am J Med Qual. 2016;31(5):408–14.
Epps HR, Levin PE. The TeamSTEPPS approach to safety and quality. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35(5 Suppl 1):S30–3.
Lisbon D, Allin D, Cleek C, et al. Improved knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors after implementation of TeamSTEPPS training in an academic emergency department: a pilot report. Am J Med Qual. 2016;31(1):86–90.
Kotter J, Rathgeber H. Our iceberg is melting: changing and succeeding under any conditions. NY: Penguin Random House; 2005.
Mann S, Marcus R, Sachs B. Lessons from the cockpit: how team training can reduce errors on L&D. Contemporary Ob/Gyn. 2006;51:34–45.
Armour Forse R, Bramble JD, McQuillan R. Team training can improve operating room performance. Surgery. 2011;150(4):771–8.
Shahian DM, McEachern K, Rossi L, et al. Large-scale implementation of the I-PASS handover system at an academic medical centre. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(9):760–70.
Gjeraa K, Mundt AS, Spanager L, et al. Important non-technical skills in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy: team perspectives. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017;104(1):329–35.
Villafranca A, Hamlin C, Enns S, et al. Disruptive behaviour in the perioperative setting: a contemporary review. Can J Anaesth. 2017;64(2):128–40.
de Vries EN, Prins HA, Crolla RM, et al. Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(20):1928–37.
Lacassie HJ, Ferdinand C, Guzmán S, et al. World Health Organization (WHO) surgical safety checklist implementation and its impact on perioperative morbidity and mortality in an academic medical center in Chile. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(23):e3844.
Lingard L, Espin S, Whyte S, et al. Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13(5):330–4.
Pronovost P, Berenholtz S, Dorman T, et al. Improving communication in the ICU using daily goals. J Crit Care. 2003;18(2):71–5.
• Lashoher A, Schneider EB, Juillard C, et al. Implementation of the World Health Organization Trauma Care Checklist Program in 11 centers across multiple economic strata: effect on care process measures. World J Surg. 2017;41(4):954–62. Checklists when used properly have been shown to provide cognitive aids that improve the quality of how practitioners deliver care.
Kawano T, Tani M, Taniwaki M, et al. A preliminary study of patients’ perceptions on the implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist in women who had cesarean sections. J Anesth. 2015;29(3):459–62.
Haugen AS, Søfteland E, Eide GE, et al. Impact of the World Health Organization’s Surgical Safety Checklist on safety culture in the operating theatre: a controlled intervention study. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110(5):807–15.
Erestam S, Haglind E, Bock D, et al. Changes in safety climate and teamwork in the operating room after implementation of a revised WHO checklist: a prospective interventional study. Patient Saf Surg. 2017;11:4.
Urbach DR, Govindarajan A, Saskin R, et al. Introduction of surgical safety checklists in Ontario, Canada. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(11):1029–38. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1308261.
Rehim SA, De Moor S, Olmsted R, et al. Tools for assessment of communication skills of hospital action teams: a systematic review. J Surg Educ. 2017;74(2):341–51.
Rao R, Dumon KR, Neylan CJ, et al. Can simulated team tasks be used to improve nontechnical skills in the operating room? J Surg Educ. 2016;73(6):e42–7.
Jirativanont T, Raksamani K, Aroonpruksakul N, et al. Validity evidence of non-technical skills assessment instruments in simulated anaesthesia crisis management. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2017;45(4):469–75.
Sparks JL, Crouch DL, Sobba K, et al. Association of a surgical task during training with team skill acquisition among surgical residents: the missing piece in multidisciplinary team training. JAMA Surg. 2017 24.
Weinger MB, Banerjee A, Burden AR, et al. Simulation-based assessment of the management of critical events by board-certified anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology. 2017;127(3):475–89.
Cole D, Giodano C, Vasilopoulos T, et al. Resident physicians improve nontechnical skills when on operating room management and leadership rotation. Anesth Analg. 2017;124(1):300–7.
Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V, Guruge S, Gamage B, et al. Interprofessional work in operating rooms: a qualitative study from Sri Lanka. BMC Surg. 2016;16(1):61.
Weller J, Civil I, Torrie J, et al. Can team training make surgery safer? Lessons for national implementation of a simulation-based programme. N Z Med J. 2016;129(1443):9–17.
Rhee AJ, Valentin-Salgado, Eshak D, et al. Team training in the perioperative arena: a methodology for implementation and auditing behavior. Am J Med Qual. 2016;32(4):369–75.
Arriaga AF, Gawande AA, Raemer DB, et al. Pilot testing of a model for insurer-driven, large-scale multicenter simulation training for operating room teams. Ann Surg. 2014;259(3):403–10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Amanda J. Rhee declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Dr. Rhee does not have any disclosures.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Patient Safety in Anesthesia
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rhee, A.J. Teamwork, Safety, and Non-Technical Skills. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 7, 427–431 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-017-0233-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-017-0233-6