Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 5/2016

01-05-2016 | Review

A systematic review of the effect of distraction on surgeon performance: directions for operating room policy and surgical training

Authors: Helena M. Mentis, Amine Chellali, Kelly Manser, Caroline G. L. Cao, Steven D. Schwaitzberg

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 5/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Distractions during surgical procedures have been linked to medical error and team inefficiency. This systematic review identifies the most common and most significant forms of distraction in order to devise guidelines for mitigating the effects of distractions in the OR.

Methods

In January 2015, a PubMed and Google Scholar search yielded 963 articles, of which 17 (2 %) either directly observed the occurrence of distractions in operating rooms or conducted a laboratory experiment to determine the effect of distraction on surgical performance.

Results

Observational studies indicated that movement and case-irrelevant conversation were the most frequently occurring distractions, but equipment and procedural distractions were the most severe. Laboratory studies indicated that (1) auditory and mental distractions can significantly impact surgical performance, but visual distractions do not incur the same level of effects; (2) task difficulty has an interaction effect with distractions; and (3) inexperienced subjects reduce their speed when faced with distractions, while experienced subjects did not.

Conclusion

This systematic review suggests that operating room protocols should ensure that distractions from intermittent auditory and mental distractions are significantly reduced. In addition, surgical residents would benefit from training for intermittent auditory and mental distractions in order to develop automaticity and high skill performance during distractions, particularly during more difficult surgical tasks. It is unclear as to whether training should be done in the presence of distractions or distractions should only be used for post-training testing of levels of automaticity.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
Healey AN, Sevdalis N, Vincent CA (2006) Measuring intra-operative interference from distraction and interruption observed in the operating theatre. Ergonomics 49:589–604CrossRefPubMed
4.
McDonald J, Orlick T, Letts M (1995) Mental readiness in surgeons and its links to performance excellence in surgery. J Pediat Orthop 15:691–697CrossRef
5.
6.
Zheng B, Martinec DV, Cassera MA, Swanström LL (2008) A quantitative study of disruption in the operating room during laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Surg Endosc 22:2171–2177CrossRefPubMed
7.
Wiegmann DA, Eggman AA, ElBardissi AW, Henrickson SE, Sundt TM (2010) Improving cardiac surgical care: a work systems approach. Appl Ergon 41:701–712CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Suh IH, Chien J-H, Mukherjee M, Park S-H, Oleynikov D, Siu K-C (2010) The negative effect of distraction on performance of robot-assisted surgical skills in medical students and residents. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 6:377–381CrossRef
9.
Rose DJ, Christina RW (2005) A Multilevel Approach to the Study of Motor Control and Learning, 2nd edn. Benjamin Cummings, Redwood City
10.
Hsu KE, Man F-Y, Gizicki RA, Feldman LS, Fried GM (2008) Experienced surgeons can do more than one thing at a time: effect of distraction on performance of a simple laparoscopic and cognitive task by experienced and novice surgeons. Surg Endosc 22:196–201CrossRefPubMed
11.
Van Selst MV, Ruthruff E, Johnston JC (1999) Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect? J Exp Psychol 25:1268–1283
12.
13.
Welford AT (1967) Single-channel operation in the brain. Acta Psychol 27:5–22CrossRef
14.
Park J, Waqar S, Kersey T, Modi N, Ong C, Sleep T (2011) Effect of distraction on simulated anterior segment surgical performance. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:1517–1522CrossRefPubMed
15.
Schneider W, Shriffin RM (1977) Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychol Rev 84:1–66CrossRef
16.
Feanny MA, Scott BG, Mattox KL, Hirshberg A (2005) The impact of the 80-hour work week on resident emergency operative experience. Am J Surg 190:947–949CrossRefPubMed
17.
Derossis AM, Bothwell J, Sigman HH, Fried GM (1998) The effect of practice on performance in a laparoscopic simulator. Surg Endosc 12:1117–1120CrossRefPubMed
18.
Feldman LS, Hagarty SE, Ghitulescu G, Stanbridge D, Fried GM (2004) Relationship between technical skills and subjective intraining evaluations in surgical residents. J Am Coll Surg 198:105–110CrossRefPubMed
19.
Peters JH, Fried GM, Swanstrom LL, Soper NJ, Sillin LF, Schirmer B, Hoffman K (2004) Development and validation of a comprehensive program of simulation in laparoscopy. Surg 135:21–27CrossRef
20.
Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240:518–528CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Wiegmann DA, ElBardissi AW, Dearani JA, Sundt TM (2006) An empirical investigation of surgical flow disruptions and their relationship to surgical errors. Paper presented at the proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th annual meeting, Hilton San Francisco Hotel, 16–20 October 2006
22.
23.
Lee JY, Lantz AG, McDougall EM, Landman J, Gettman M, Sweet R et al (2013) Evaluation of potential distractors in the urology operating room. J Endourol 27:1161–1165CrossRefPubMed
24.
Persoon M, Broos HJHP, Witjes JA, Hendrikx AJM, Sherpbier AJJM (2011) The effect of distractions in the operating room during endourological procedures. Surg Endosc 25:437–443CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Sevdalis N, Healey AN, Vincent CA (2007) Distracting communications in the operating theatre. J Eval Clin Prac 13:390–394CrossRef
26.
Sevdalis N, Undre S, McDermott J, Giddie J, Diner L, Smith G (2014) Impact of intraoperative distractions on patient safety: a prospective descriptive study using validated instruments. World J Surg 38(4):751–758CrossRefPubMed
27.
Szafranski C, Kahol K, Ghaemmaghami V, Smith M, Ferrara JJ (2009) Distractions and surgical proficiency: an educational perspective. Am J Surg 198:804–810CrossRefPubMed
28.
Pluyter JR, Buzink SN, Rutkowski A-F, Jakimowicz JJ (2010) Do absorption and realistic distraction influence performance of component task surgical procedure? Surg Endosc 24:902–907CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Siu K-C, Suh IH, Mukherjee M, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N (2010) The impact of environmental noise on robot-assisted laparoscopic surgical performance. Surgery 147:107–113CrossRefPubMed
30.
Siu K-C, Suh I, Mukherjee M, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N (2010) The effect of music on robot-assisted laparoscopic surgical performance. Surg Innov 17:306–311CrossRefPubMed
31.
Moorthy K, Munz Y, Undre S, Darzi A (2004) Objective evaluation of the effect of noise on the performance of a complex laparoscopic task. Surgery 136:25–30CrossRefPubMed
32.
Conrad C, Konuk Y, Werner P, Cao CG, Warshaw A, Rattner D, Jones DB, Gee D (2010) The effect of defined auditory conditions versus mental loading on the laparoscopic motor skill performance of experts. Surg Endosc 24:1347–1352CrossRefPubMed
33.
Conrad C, Konuk Y, Werner PD, Cao CG, Warshaw AL, Rattner DW et al (2012) A quality improvement study on avoidable stressors and countermeasures affecting surgical motor performance and learning. Ann Surg 255:1190–1194CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Goodell KH, Cao CGL, Schwaitzberg SD (2006) Effects of cognitive distraction on performance of laparoscopic surgical tasks. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 15:94–98CrossRef
35.
Feuerbacher RL, Funk KH, Spight DH, Diggs BS, Hunter JG (2012) Realistic distractions and interruptions that impair simulated surgical performance by novice surgeons. Arch Surg 147:1026–1030CrossRefPubMed
36.
Wong SW, Smith R, Crowe P (2010) Optimizing the operating theatre environment. ANZ J Surg 80:917–924CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
A systematic review of the effect of distraction on surgeon performance: directions for operating room policy and surgical training
Authors
Helena M. Mentis
Amine Chellali
Kelly Manser
Caroline G. L. Cao
Steven D. Schwaitzberg
Publication date
01-05-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4443-z

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Surgical Endoscopy 5/2016 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Major bile duct injury requiring operative reconstruction after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a follow-on study

OriginalPaper

Laparoscopy decreases complications for obese patients undergoing elective rectal surgery

OriginalPaper

Feasibility and safety of laparoendoscopic single-site surgery of total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair after previous open groin hernia repair: a comparative study

OriginalPaper

The impact of postoperative complications on the recovery of elderly surgical patients

Technique

Laparoscopic surgery in middle- and low-income countries: gasless lift laparoscopic surgery

OriginalPaper

Laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection is achievable and offers advantages as a minimally invasive surgery over the open approach