Abstract
Background & purpose Debriefing facilitates team learning but currently is not consistently performed in operating rooms. Barriers exist to consistent, effective operative team debriefing. The purpose of this study was to identify these barriers and their potential solutions as articulated by front-line staff in the operating room.
Methods We interviewed staff in the operating theatre of a children’s hospital and undertook reflexive thematic analysis with a critical realist theoretical framework.
Results Interviews were analysed from 40 operating room staff: 14 nurses, 7 anaesthetists, 7 anaesthetic technicians, and 12 surgeons; 25 (62%) were female. The key themes were: one of the most valuable things − teamwork and audit; it’s a safe space – psychological safety is a pre-requisite of, and is enhanced by, debriefing; natural born leader − constructs around leadership; space-time – finding time to debrief, routinely and after critical events; and doing the basics well – structure without over-complication.
Conclusion Psychological safety is both a prerequisite for and a product of debriefing. Leadership, if viewed as a collective responsibility, could help break down power structures. Given the results of this study and evidence in the literature, it is likely that routine debriefing, if well done, will improve psychological safety, facilitate team learning, reduce errors, and improve patient safety.
Clinical relevance Debriefing in the operating room can help break down power structures, improve psychological safety, promote team learning, and lead to improved patient safety. Debriefing is challenging to perform, requires leadership, and should be seen as a collective responsibility.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Starship Foundation, Aotearoa New Zealand.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was registered with the institutional research office and received ethical approval from the Auckland Health Research Ethics Committee (#3228).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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
Footnotes
Declarations Emma Skegg and Mercedes Mudgway were funded through a Starship Foundation® Grant (SF2142). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
