TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation and Impact of Workflow Interruptions during Robot-assisted Surgery
AU - Allers, Jenna C.
AU - Hussein, Ahmed A.
AU - Ahmad, Nabeeha
AU - Cavuoto, Lora
AU - Wing, Joseph F.
AU - Hayes, Robin M.
AU - Hinata, Nobuyuki
AU - Bisantz, Ann M.
AU - Guru, Khurshid A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding Support: This research was supported in part by funding from the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (under award number: R25CA181003 ) and Roswell Park Alliance Foundation . The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2016/6/1
Y1 - 2016/6/1
N2 - Objective To analyze and categorize causes for interruptions during robot-assisted surgery. Methods We analyzed 10 robot-assisted prostatectomies that were performed by 3 surgeons from October 2014 to June 2015. Interruptions to surgery were defined in terms of duration, stage of surgery, personnel involved, reasons, and impact of the interruption on the surgical workflow. Results The main reasons for interruptions included the following: console surgeons switching (29%); preparation of the surgical equipment, such as cleaning or changing the camera (29%) or an instrument (27%); or when a suture, stapler, or clip was needed (12%). The most common interruption duration was 10-29 seconds (47.6%), and the least common interruption duration was greater than 90 seconds (3.6%). Additionally, about 14% of the interruptions were considered avoidable, whereas the remaining 86% of interruptions were necessary for surgery. Conclusion By identifying and analyzing interruptions, we can develop evidence-based strategies to improve operating room efficiency, lower costs, and advance patient safety.
AB - Objective To analyze and categorize causes for interruptions during robot-assisted surgery. Methods We analyzed 10 robot-assisted prostatectomies that were performed by 3 surgeons from October 2014 to June 2015. Interruptions to surgery were defined in terms of duration, stage of surgery, personnel involved, reasons, and impact of the interruption on the surgical workflow. Results The main reasons for interruptions included the following: console surgeons switching (29%); preparation of the surgical equipment, such as cleaning or changing the camera (29%) or an instrument (27%); or when a suture, stapler, or clip was needed (12%). The most common interruption duration was 10-29 seconds (47.6%), and the least common interruption duration was greater than 90 seconds (3.6%). Additionally, about 14% of the interruptions were considered avoidable, whereas the remaining 86% of interruptions were necessary for surgery. Conclusion By identifying and analyzing interruptions, we can develop evidence-based strategies to improve operating room efficiency, lower costs, and advance patient safety.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84964317499&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84964317499&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2016.02.040
DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2016.02.040
M3 - Article
C2 - 26966039
AN - SCOPUS:84964317499
SN - 0090-4295
VL - 92
SP - 33
EP - 37
JO - Urology
JF - Urology
ER -