Audio-video recording during laparoscopic surgery reduces irrelevant conversation between surgeons: a cohort study

Hannah Bergström, Lars-Göran Larsson, Erik Stenberg, Hannah Bergström, Lars-Göran Larsson, Erik Stenberg

Abstract

Background: The prevalence of perioperative surgical complications is a worldwide issue: In many cases, these events are preventable. Audio-video recording during laparoscopic surgery provides useful information for the purposes of education and event analyses, and may have an impact on the focus of the surgeons operating. The aim of the present study was to investigate how audio-video recording in the operating room during laparoscopic surgery affects the focus of the surgeon and his/her assistant.

Methods: A group of laparoscopic procedures where video recording only was performed was compared to a group where both audio and video recordings were made. All laparoscopic procedures were performed at Lindesberg Hospital, Sweden, during the period August to September 2017. The primary outcome was conversation not relevant to the ongoing procedure. Secondary outcomes were intra- and postoperative adverse events or complications, operation time and number of times the assistant was corrected by the surgeon.

Results: The study included 41 procedures, 20 in the video only group and 21 in the audio-video group. The material comprised laparoscopic cholecystectomies, totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairs and bariatric surgical procedures. Irrelevant conversation time fell from 4.2% of surgical time to 1.4% when both audio and video recordings were made (p = 0.002). No differences in perioperative adverse event or complication rates were seen.

Conclusion: Audio-video recording during laparoscopic abdominal surgery reduces irrelevant conversation time and may improve intraoperative safety and surgical outcome.

Trial registration: Available at FOU Sweden (ID: 232771) and retrospectively at Clinical trials.gov (ID: NCT03425175 ; date of registration 7/2 2018).

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee in Uppsala (Reference number 2017/247), and was conducted in accordance with the standards of the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. All members of the operation team and patients were informed of the audio-video recording and the presence of an external observer. Since the introduction of audio-video recording was a change in hospital routine, no written consent was obtained. This was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Time with irrelevant discussion during surgical procedures. Box-plot presenting time (seconds) with irrelevant discussion with or without audio-video recording

References

    1. Gawande AA, Thomas EJ, Zinner MJ, Brennan TA. The incidence and nature of surgical adverse events in Colorado and Utah in 1992. Surgery. 1999;126(1):66–75. doi: 10.1067/msy.1999.98664.
    1. Kable AK, Gibberd RW, Spigelman AD. Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14(4):269–276. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/14.4.269.
    1. Thorell A, MacCormick AD, Awad S, et al. Guidelines for perioperative Care in Bariatric Surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) society recommendations. World J Surg. 2016;40(9):2065–2083. doi: 10.1007/s00268-016-3492-3.
    1. Birkmeyer JD, Finks JF, O'Reilly A, et al. Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(15):1434–1442. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1300625.
    1. Enochsson L, Thulin A, Osterberg J, Sandblom G, Persson G. The Swedish registry of gallstone surgery and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (GallRiks): a nationwide registry for quality assurance of gallstone surgery. JAMA Surg. 2013;148(5):471–478. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.1221.
    1. Stenberg E, Szabo E, Agren G, et al. Early complications after laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery: results from the scandinavian obesity surgery registry. Ann Surg. 2014;260(6):1040–1047. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000431.
    1. Birkmeyer NJ, Dimick JB, Share D, et al. Hospital complication rates with bariatric surgery in Michigan. JAMA. 2010;304(4):435–442. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1034.
    1. Armellino D, Hussain E, Schilling ME, et al. Using high-technology to enforce low-technology safety measures: the use of third-party remote video auditing and real-time feedback in healthcare. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(1):1–7. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir773.
    1. Rex DK, Hewett DG, Raghavendra M, Chalasani N. The impact of videorecording on the quality of colonoscopy performance: a pilot study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105(11):2312–2317. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.245.
    1. Scherer LA, Chang MC, Meredith JW, Battistella FD. Videotape review leads to rapid and sustained learning. Am J Surg. 2003;185(6):516–520. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(03)00062-X.
    1. Touijer K, Kuroiwa K, Saranchuk JW, et al. Quality improvement in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for pT2 prostate cancer: impact of video documentation review on positive surgical margin. J Urol. 2005;173(3):765–768. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000146574.52402.d5.
    1. Greenstein AJ, Wahed AS, Adeniji A, et al. Prevalence of adverse intraoperative events during obesity surgery and their sequelae. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;215(2):271–277. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.03.008.
    1. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, et al. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(5):491–499. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0810119.
    1. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–196. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2.
    1. World Medical A World medical association declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
    1. Tschan F, Seelandt JC, Keller S, et al. Impact of case-relevant and case-irrelevant communication within the surgical team on surgical-site infection. Br J Surg. 2015;102(13):1718–1725. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9927.
    1. Stenberg E, Szabo E, Naslund I, Ottosson J. Bleeding during laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery as a risk factor for less favorable outcome. A cohort study from the Scandinavian obesity surgery registry. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(10):1735–1740. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2017.05.028.
    1. Bonrath EM, Gordon LE, Grantcharov TP. Characterising 'near miss' events in complex laparoscopic surgery through video analysis. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015;24(8):516–521. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003816.
    1. Hu YY, Peyre SE, Arriaga AF, et al. Postgame analysis: using video-based coaching for continuous professional development. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214(1):115–124. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.10.009.
    1. Bogen EM, Augestad KM, Patel HR, Lindsetmo RO. Telementoring in education of laparoscopic surgeons: an emerging technology. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;6(5):148–155. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v6.i5.148.
    1. Makary MA, Xu T, Pawlik TM. Can video recording revolutionise medical quality? BMJ. 2015;351:h5169. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h5169.
    1. Gelbart B, Barfield C, Watkins A. Ethical and legal considerations in video recording neonatal resuscitations. J Med Ethics. 2009;35(2):120–124. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.024612.
    1. Bell SK, Smulowitz PB, Woodward AC, et al. Disclosure, apology, and offer programs: stakeholders' views of barriers to and strategies for broad implementation. Milbank Q. 2012;90(4):682–705. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00679.x.
    1. Raghavendra M, Rex DK. Patient interest in video recording of colonoscopy: a survey. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16(4):458–461. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i4.458.
    1. Finks JF, Kole KL, Yenumula PR, et al. Predicting risk for serious complications with bariatric surgery: results from the Michigan bariatric surgery collaborative. Ann Surg. 2011;254(4):633–640. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318230058c.
    1. Kais H, Hershkovitz Y, Abu-Snina Y, Chikman B, Halevy A. Different setups of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: conversion and complication rates: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2014;12(12):1258–1261. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.10.006.
    1. Ramshaw B, Shuler FW, Jones HB, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: lessons learned after 1224 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(1):50–54. doi: 10.1007/s004640001016.
    1. Rampersad SE, Martin LD, Geiduschek JM, Weiss GK, Bates SW, Martin LD. Video observation of anesthesia practice: a useful and reliable tool for quality improvement initiatives. Paediatr Anaesth. 2013;23(7):627–633. doi: 10.1111/pan.12198.
    1. Sugamoto Y, Hamamoto Y, Kimura M, et al. A novel method for real-time audio recording with intraoperative video. J Surg Educ. 2015;72(5):795–802. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.03.020.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться