Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Sep;177(1):37-42.
doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.04.029. Epub 2012 May 4.

Deconstructing intraoperative communication failures

Affiliations

Deconstructing intraoperative communication failures

Yue-Yung Hu et al. J Surg Res. 2012 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Communication failure is a common contributor to adverse events. We sought to characterize communication failures during complex operations.

Methods: We video recorded and transcribed six complex operations, representing 22 h of patient care. For each communication event, we determined the participants and the content discussed. Failures were classified into four types: audience (key individuals missing), purpose (issue nonresolution), content (insufficient/inaccurate information), and/or occasion (futile timing). We added a systems category to reflect communication occurring at the organizational level. The impact of each identified failure was described.

Results: We observed communication failures in every case (mean 29, median 28, range 13-48), at a rate of one every 8 min. Cross-disciplinary exchanges resulted in failure nearly twice as often as intradisciplinary ones. Discussions about or mandated by hospital policy (20%), personnel (18%), or other patient care (17%) were most error prone. Audience and purpose each accounted for >40% of failures. A substantial proportion (26%) reflected flawed systems for communication, particularly those for disseminating policy (29% of system failures), coordinating personnel (27%), and conveying the procedure planned (27%) or the equipment needed (24%). In 81% of failures, inefficiency (extraneous discussion and/or work) resulted. Resource waste (19%) and work-arounds (13%) also were frequently seen.

Conclusions: During complex operations, communication failures occur frequently and lead to inefficiency. Prevention may be achieved by improving synchronous, cross-disciplinary communication. The rate of failure during discussions about/mandated by policy highlights the need for carefully designed standardized interventions. System-level support for asynchronous perioperative communication may streamline operating room coordination and preparation efforts.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. JCAHO. Sentinel event data: root causes by event type (2004-second quarter 2011) 2011
    1. Griffen FD, Stephens LS, Alexander JB, Bailey HR, Maizel SE, Sutton BH, et al. Violations of behavioral practices revealed in closed claims reviews. Ann Surg. 2008;248:468. - PubMed
    1. Greenberg CC, Regenbogen SE, Studdert DM, Lipsitz SR, Rogers SO, Zinner MJ, et al. Patterns of communication breakdowns resulting in injury to surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:533. - PubMed
    1. Davenport DL, Henderson WG, Mosca CL, Khuri SF, Mentzer RM., Jr Risk-adjusted morbidity in teaching hospitals correlates with reported levels of communication and collaboration on surgical teams but not with scale measures of teamwork climate, safety climate, or working conditions. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;205:778. - PubMed
    1. Mazzocco K, Petitti DB, Fong KT, Bonacum D, Brookey J, Graham S, et al. Surgical team behaviors and patient outcomes. Am J Surg. 2009;197:678. - PubMed

MeSH terms