Impact of the complexity of surgical procedures and intraoperative interruptions on neurosurgical team workload

Examining workload variations among different surgical team roles, specialties, and techniques: a multicenter cross-sectional descriptive study

BACKGROUND

A high workload may negatively impact the surgical team's performance and jeopardize patient safety. The aim of this study was to measure the workload of the surgical team across different surgical roles, specialties, and techniques in several hospitals.

METHODS

This cross-sectional multicenter study was performed in the operating rooms of eight teaching hospitals affiliated with Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. At the conclusion of each surgical procedure, all members of the surgical team completed the Surgery Task Load Index (SURG-TLX) questionnaire to assess workload levels. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Pearson correlations, were performed to compare surgical roles, specialties, techniques, and surgical time on workload overall and by subscale.

RESULTS

A total of 409 workload questionnaires were obtained from 76 surgical teams or cases, involving 346 surgical team members. The total workload among all participants was 32.41 ± 17.21. Surgical complexity, physical demands, and mental demands were the highest workload subscales and distraction was the lowest workload subscale. Cardiovascular specialty had a higher workload compared to other specialties. Open techniques resulted in a higher workload compared to minimally invasive techniques. Surgical technologists who act in both the role of circulating and scrub nurse (C&Ss) experienced the highest workload, followed by surgical residents and surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study showed that the workload for some members of the surgical team is disproportionately high and is influenced by factors such as specialty, technique, role, and surgical duration. By knowing the distribution of workload among the members of the surgical team, efforts can be made to optimize the team members' workload.

Current State of Brazilian Neurosurgery: Evaluation of Burden of Care and Case Volume

BACKGROUND

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) bear a heavier burden of neurosurgical diseases than high-income countries. Brazil, a growing middle-income country, holds promise as a health care market. However, there exists a lack of information to characterize the state of neurosurgical practice and access to care in Brazil. This study aimed to characterize neurosurgical practice in Brazil and identify barriers to care.

METHODS

A collaborative survey was developed with Brazilian neurosurgeons and distributed by the Brazilian Society of Neurosurgery. The survey gathered demographic information, practice characteristics, case volume, referral patterns, income sources, and assessed barriers using a Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

One-hundred and forty-nine neurosurgeons participated (response rate: 17.5%), representing various states in Brazil. Neurosurgeons practiced in more than 4 different hospital systems on average, with most consultations and procedures occurring in public hospitals. Common procedures included tumor surgeries, general neurosurgery, spine surgeries, trauma surgeries, and hydrocephalus management. Equipment shortage and systemic issues were identified as major barriers to care.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurosurgical practice in Brazil exhibits diverse age distribution, widespread distribution across states, and involvement in both public and private hospitals. Survey insights shed light on neurosurgical workload and neurosurgical practice characterization. Lack of equipment and inadequate postoperative resources pose significant barriers to care. The findings highlight the need for investments in equipment, critical care facilities, and improved health care system coordination to enhance access to neurosurgical care in Brazil.

Design guidelines for limiting and eliminating virtual reality-induced symptoms and effects at work: a comprehensive, factor-oriented review

Virtual reality (VR) can induce side effects known as virtual reality-induced symptoms and effects (VRISE). To address this concern, we identify a literature-based listing of these factors thought to influence VRISE with a focus on office work use. Using those, we recommend guidelines for VRISE amelioration intended for virtual environment creators and users. We identify five VRISE risks, focusing on short-term symptoms with their short-term effects. Three overall factor categories are considered: individual, hardware, and software. Over 90 factors may influence VRISE frequency and severity. We identify guidelines for each factor to help reduce VR side effects. To better reflect our confidence in those guidelines, we graded each with a level of evidence rating. Common factors occasionally influence different forms of VRISE. This can lead to confusion in the literature. General guidelines for using VR at work involve worker adaptation, such as limiting immersion times to between 20 and 30 min. These regimens involve taking regular breaks. Extra care is required for workers with special needs, neurodiversity, and gerontechnological concerns. In addition to following our guidelines, stakeholders should be aware that current head-mounted displays and virtual environments can continue to induce VRISE. While no single existing method fully alleviates VRISE, workers' health and safety must be monitored and safeguarded when VR is used at work.

Is It the Load That Breaks You or the Way You Carry It: How Demanding Is Endourology?

Objective: Surgical outcomes are dependent on multiple factors. Besides patient-related or procedure-related factors, several surgeon-related factors contribute to surgical outcomes. The Surgery Task Load Index (SURG-TLX) questionnaire helps to assess the impact of several stressors on the perceived demands of surgeons during surgery. In this study, we evaluate the applicability of the SURG-TLX questionnaire for endourologic procedures and set a first point of reference. Materials and Methods: Between March and August 2022, 15 urologists and urology residents at a tertiary referral center for endourology completed the SURG-TLX questionnaire after endourologic procedures. After data acquisition, all participants were asked to evaluate the applicability of the questionnaire for endourologic procedures. Results: A total of 130 procedures were included between March and August 2022. Situational stress had the lowest median score (3.0/20; interquartile range [IQR] 2.0-7.0) and task complexity the highest (5.0/20; IQR 3.0-8.0). After weighing, the dimensions showed different proportions when compared with the nonweighted scores. Distractions received the highest score (15.0/100; IQR 7.5-32.8), temporal demands (6.0/100; IQR 3.0-12.5), and situational stress the lowest (6.0/100; IQR 2.0-21.0). This was caused by the higher weight that was attributed to distractions (3.4/5), as opposed to task complexity (2.6/5). In the questionnaire regarding applicability of the SURG-TLX, the overall satisfaction (6.0/10; IQR 5.0-7.0) and clarity (6.5/10; IQR 5.0-7.5) were moderate. The user-friendliness and applicability of the questionnaire were rated high (7.0/10; IQR 5.5-8.0 and 7.0/10; IQR 6.0-8.0, respectively) and task load (3.0/10; IQR 2.0-5.0) and time load (2.0/10; IQR 2.0-3.5) low. Conclusion: The SURG-TLX questionnaire is appropriate to assess the different dimensions of workload during endourologic procedures. Furthermore, the perceived workload during endourologic procedures is relatively low.

Between-Hospital and Between-Physician Variation in Outcomes and Costs in High- and Low-Complex Surgery: A Nationwide Multilevel Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Clinicians and policy makers are increasingly exploring strategies to reduce unwarranted variation in outcomes and costs. Adequately accounting for case mix and better insight into the levels at which variation exists is crucial for such strategies. This nationwide study investigates variation in surgical outcomes and costs at the level of hospitals and individual physicians and evaluates whether these can be reliably compared on performance.

METHODS

Variation was analyzed using 92 330 patient records collected from 62 Dutch hospitals who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer (n = 6640), urinary bladder cancer (n = 14 030), myocardial infarction (n = 31 870), or knee osteoarthritis (n = 39 790) in the period 2018 to 2019. Multilevel regression modeling with and without case-mix adjustment was used to partition variation in between-hospital and between-physician components for in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, 30-day readmission, 30-day reintervention, and in-hospital costs. Reliability was calculated for each treatment-outcome combination at both levels.

RESULTS

Across outcomes, hospital-level variation relative to total variation ranged between ≤ 1% and 15%, and given the high caseloads, this typically yielded high reliability (> 0.9). In contrast, physician-level variation components were typically ≤ 1%, with limited opportunities to make reliable comparisons. The impact of case-mix adjustment was limited, but nonnegligible.

CONCLUSIONS

It is not typically possible to make reliable comparisons among physicians due to limited partitioned variation and low caseloads. Nevertheless, for hospitals, the opposite often holds. Although variation-reduction efforts directed at hospitals are thus more likely to be successful, this should be approached cautiously, partly because level-specific variation and the impact of case mix vary considerably across treatments and outcomes.