Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14(04): 772-778
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1772687
Case Report

Surgery and Anesthesia Preoperative “Virtual Huddle”: A Pilot Trial to Enhance Communication across the Drape

Nicole H. Goldhaber
1   Department of Surgery, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
J. Jeffery Reeves
1   Department of Surgery, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
Dhruv Puri
2   School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
Jennifer A. Berumen
1   Department of Surgery, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
Minh Tran
3   Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
Brian J. Clay
4   Department of Medicine, Division of Biomedical Informatics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
Christopher A. Longhurst
4   Department of Medicine, Division of Biomedical Informatics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
,
Byron Fergerson
3   Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives Effective communication between surgeons and anesthesiologists is critical for high-quality, safe, and efficient perioperative patient care. Despite widespread implementation of surgical safety checklists and time-outs, ineffective team communication remains a leading cause of patient safety events in the operating room. To promote effective communication, we conducted a pilot trial of a “virtual huddle” between anesthesiologists and surgeons.

Methods Attending anesthesiologists and surgeons at an academic medical center were recruited by email to participate in this feasibility trial. An electronic health record-based smartphone application was utilized to create secure group chats among trial participants the day before a surgery. Text notifications connected a surgeon/anesthesiologist pair in order to introduce colleagues, facilitate a preoperative virtual huddle, and enable open-ended, text message-based communication. A 5-point Likert scale-based survey with a free-text component was used to evaluate the utility of the virtual huddle and usability of the electronic platform.

Results A total of 51 unique virtual huddles occurred between 16 surgeons and 12 anesthesiologists over 99 operations. All postintervention survey questions received a positive rating (range: 3.50/5.00–4.53/5.00) and the virtual huddle was considered to be easy to use (4.47/5.00), improve attending-to-attending communication (4.29/5.00), and improve patient care (4.22/5.00). There were no statistically significant differences in the ratings between surgery and anesthesia. In thematic analysis of qualitative survey results, Participants indicated the intervention was particularly useful in interdisciplinary relationship-building and reducing room turnover. The huddle was less useful for simple, routine cases or when participation was one sided.

Conclusion A preoperative virtual huddle may be a simple and effective intervention to improve communication and teamwork in the operating room. Further study and consideration of broader implementation is warranted.

Keywords

provider–provider communication - mobile computing and communication - perioperative services - interdisciplinary care teams - process improvement

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

The study was performed in compliance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and was reviewed by the University of California, San Diego Institutional Review Board.




Publication History

Received: 05 February 2023

Accepted: 19 July 2023

Article published online:
27 September 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Hicks CW, Rosen M, Hobson DB, Ko C, Wick EC. Improving safety and quality of care with enhanced teamwork through operating room briefings. JAMA Surg 2014; 149 (08) 863-868
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Goyal R. Surgeons and anesthesiologists: need to communicate?. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2013; 29 (03) 297-298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 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 (05) 330-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Hu YY, Arriaga AF, Peyre SE, Corso KA, Roth EM, Greenberg CC. Deconstructing intraoperative communication failures. J Surg Res 2012; 177 (01) 37-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wiegmann DA, ElBardissi AW, Dearani JA, Daly RC, Sundt III TM. Disruptions in surgical flow and their relationship to surgical errors: an exploratory investigation. Surgery 2007; 142 (05) 658-665
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Neuhaus C, Huck M, Hofmann G, St Pierre M, Weigand MA, Lichtenstern C. Applying the human factors analysis and classification system to critical incident reports in anaesthesiology. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2018; 62 (10) 1403-1411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Communication failure in the operating room. Accessed January 02, 2023 at: https://psnet.ahrq.gov/issue/communication-failure-operating-room
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Greenberg CC, Regenbogen SE, Studdert DM. et al. Patterns of communication breakdowns resulting in injury to surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg 2007; 204 (04) 533-540
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Nagpal K, Vats A, Ahmed K. et al. A systematic quantitative assessment of risks associated with poor communication in surgical care. Arch Surg 2010; 145 (06) 582-588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Universal Protocol | The Joint Commission. Accessed January 02, 2023 at: https://www.jointcommission.org/standards/universal-protocol/
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dayton E, Henriksen K. Communication failure: basic components, contributing factors, and the call for structure. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2007; 33 (01) 34-47
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gillespie BM, Chaboyer W, Murray P. Enhancing communication in surgery through team training interventions: a systematic literature review. AORN J 2010; 92 (06) 642-657
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sentinel event statistics released for 2015. Jt Comm Perspect 2016; 36 (04) 10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Riveros Perez E, Kerko R, Lever N, White A, Kahf S, Avella-Molano B. Operating room relay strategy for turnover time improvement: a quality improvement project. BMJ Open Qual 2022; 11 (03) e001957
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 World Health Organization. Implementation Manual: WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (1st ed.). World Health Organization; 2008 Accessed January 02, 2023 at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/70046
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 A worked example of Braun and Clarke's approach to reflexive thematic analysis | SpringerLink. Accessed January 02, 2023 at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Luu T, Spiegelman L, Nykin D. et al. Implementation of an electronic health record-based messaging system in the emergency department: effects on physician workflow and resident burnout. J Patient Saf 2022; 18 (02) e542-e546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 McElroy LM, Macapagal KR, Collins KM. et al. Clinician perceptions of operating room to intensive care unit handoffs and implications for patient safety: a qualitative study. Am J Surg 2015; 210 (04) 629-635
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Amato-Vealey EJ, Barba MP, Vealey RJ. Hand-off communication: a requisite for perioperative patient safety. AORN J 2008; 88 (05) 763-770 , quiz 771–774
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Reeves JJ, Pageler NM, Wick EC. et al. The clinical information systems response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Yearb Med Inform 2021; 30 (01) 105-125
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Eberlin KR, Perdikis G, Damitz L, Krochmal DJ, Kalliainen LK, Bonawitz SC. ASPS Health Policy Committee. Electronic communication in plastic surgery: guiding principles from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons Health Policy Committee. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 141 (02) 500-505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Johnson JK, Arora VM. Can we talk? The art (and science) of handoff conversation. BMJ Qual Saf 2016; 25 (02) 63-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Manser T, Foster S, Flin R, Patey R. Team communication during patient handover from the operating room: more than facts and figures. Hum Factors 2013; 55 (01) 138-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Zhou Y, Ancker JS, Upadhye M. et al. The impact of interoperability of electronic health records on ambulatory physician practices: a discrete-event simulation study. Inform Prim Care 2013; 21 (01) 21-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hravnak M, Pellathy T, Chen L. et al. A call to alarms: current state and future directions in the battle against alarm fatigue. J Electrocardiol 2018; 51 (6S): S44-S48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wanderer JP, Gruss CL, Ehrenfeld JM. Using visual analytics to determine the utilization of preoperative anesthesia assessments. Appl Clin Inform 2015; 6 (04) 629-637
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Reeves JJ, Hollandsworth HM, Torriani FJ. et al. Rapid response to COVID-19: health informatics support for outbreak management in an academic health system. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (06) 853-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar