Team performance during vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery: video review of obstetric multidisciplinary teams

Vacuum extraction is generally considered an operator-dependent task, with most attention directed toward the obstetrician's technical abilities (1-3). Little is known about the effect of the team and non-technical skills on clinical outcomes in vacuum-assisted delivery. This study aimed to inv...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in medicine 2024-03, Vol.11, p.1330457-1330457
Hauptverfasser: Brogaard, L, Rosvig, L, Hjorth-Hansen, K R, Hvidman, L, Hinshaw, K, Kierkegaard, O, Uldbjerg, N, Manser, T
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Vacuum extraction is generally considered an operator-dependent task, with most attention directed toward the obstetrician's technical abilities (1-3). Little is known about the effect of the team and non-technical skills on clinical outcomes in vacuum-assisted delivery. This study aimed to investigate whether the non-technical skills of obstetricians were correlated with their level of clinical performance via the analysis of video recordings of teams conducting actual vacuum extractions. We installed between two or three video cameras in each delivery room at Aarhus University Hospital and Horsens Regional Hospital and obtained 60 videos of teams managing vacuum extraction. Appropriate consent was obtained. Two raters carefully reviewed the videos and assessed the teams' non-technical skills using the Assessment of Obstetric Team Performance (AOTP) checklist, rating all items on a Likert scale score from 1 to 5 (1 = poor; 3 = average; and 5 = excellent). This resulted in a total score ranging from 18 to 90. Two different raters independently assessed the teams' clinical performance (adherence to clinical guidelines) using the TeamOBS-Vacuum-Assisted Delivery (VAD) checklist, rating each item (0 = not done, 1 = done incorrectly; and 2 = done correctly). This resulted in a total score with the following ranges (low clinical performance: 0-59; average: 60-84; and high: 85-100). Interrater agreement was analyzed using intraclass correlation (ICC), and the risk of high or low clinical performance was analyzed on a logit scale to meet the assumption of normality. Teams that received excellent non-technical scores had an 81% probability of achieving high clinical performance, whereas this probability was only 12% among teams with average non-technical scores (  
ISSN:2296-858X
2296-858X
DOI:10.3389/fmed.2024.1330457