Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Debriefing surgery: a systematic review

Emma Skegg, Canice McElroy, Mercedes Mudgway, View ORCID ProfileJames Hamill
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.02.22277174
Emma Skegg
1Starship Children’s Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Canice McElroy
1Starship Children’s Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mercedes Mudgway
1Starship Children’s Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James Hamill
1Starship Children’s Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand
2Department of Paediatrics, Child and Youth Health, the University of Auckland, New Zealand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James Hamill
  • For correspondence: jham011@aucklanduni.ac.nz
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives Debriefing has been pivotal in medical simulation training but its application to the real-world operating room environment has been challenging. We aimed to review the literature on routine surgical debriefing with specific reference to its implementation, barriers, and effectiveness.

Methods Inclusion criteria were studies pertaining to debriefing in routine practice in the operating room. Excluded were studies on simulation and training. We searched the databases Google Scholar, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, PsychINFO, Medline, Embase, and ProQuest Theses & Dissertations Global. The last search was performed in March 2022. Quality was assessed on a 21-point checklist adapted from a standard reporting guideline. Synthesis was descriptive.

Results The search identified 19 papers. Publication date ranged from 2007 – 2022. Five studies involved a specific intervention. Methodology of studies included surveys, interviews, and analysis of administrative data. Quality scores ranged from 12 – 19 out of 21. On synthesis we identified four topics: explanations of how debriefing had been implemented; the learning dimensions of debriefing, both team learning and quality improvement at the organisational level; the effect of debriefing on patient safety or the organisation’s culture; and the barriers to debriefing.

Conclusion Debriefing is valuable for team learning, efficiency, patient safety, and psychological safety. Successful implementation programs were characterised by strong commitment from management and support by frontline workers. Integration with administrative quality and safety processes, and information feedback to frontline workers, are fundamental to successful debriefing programs.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study was funded by the University of Auckland (Summer Studentship grants for two authors) and a Starhip Foundation Grant.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript and supplementary material

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted July 05, 2022.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Debriefing surgery: a systematic review
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Debriefing surgery: a systematic review
Emma Skegg, Canice McElroy, Mercedes Mudgway, James Hamill
medRxiv 2022.07.02.22277174; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.02.22277174
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Debriefing surgery: a systematic review
Emma Skegg, Canice McElroy, Mercedes Mudgway, James Hamill
medRxiv 2022.07.02.22277174; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.02.22277174

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Surgery
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (179)
  • Allergy and Immunology (434)
  • Anesthesia (99)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (948)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (178)
  • Dermatology (110)
  • Emergency Medicine (260)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (422)
  • Epidemiology (8987)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (420)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1959)
  • Geriatric Medicine (190)
  • Health Economics (402)
  • Health Informatics (1329)
  • Health Policy (660)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (519)
  • Hematology (212)
  • HIV/AIDS (420)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10809)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (575)
  • Medical Education (200)
  • Medical Ethics (54)
  • Nephrology (222)
  • Neurology (1830)
  • Nursing (110)
  • Nutrition (274)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (353)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (470)
  • Oncology (999)
  • Ophthalmology (298)
  • Orthopedics (111)
  • Otolaryngology (182)
  • Pain Medicine (126)
  • Palliative Medicine (44)
  • Pathology (265)
  • Pediatrics (580)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (276)
  • Primary Care Research (234)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1903)
  • Public and Global Health (4123)
  • Radiology and Imaging (676)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (368)
  • Respiratory Medicine (549)
  • Rheumatology (225)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (191)
  • Sports Medicine (177)
  • Surgery (207)
  • Toxicology (39)
  • Transplantation (109)
  • Urology (81)