Improving Faculty's Ability to Speak Up to Others in the Operating Room

NCT ID: NCT02170818

Last Updated: 2014-06-23

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

310 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2008-03-31

Study Completion Date

2014-05-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Importance Team members speaking-up by raising concerns about inappropriate or unsafe actions of others within the team can have direct, immediate, and preventive effect on adverse outcomes. However, little is known about the hurdles and enablers of this behavior in healthcare, especially within the operating room setting.

Objective

1\. Determine if an educational workshop would improve speaking-up behaviors of practicing anesthesiologists when presented with realistically-simulated clinical situations. 2.Describe speaking-up behaviors addressed to a surgeon, a nurse, and a colleague. 3. Identify the self-reported hurdles and enablers for speaking-up in those situations encountered.

Design Randomized controlled experiment of an educational workshop intervention on communication behaviors in a simulated case. Qualitative analysis of debriefing conversations following the simulated case.

Setting Established academic simulation center

Participants Seventy-one practicing anesthesiologists from four academic medical centers and one community hospital

Intervention Fifty minute educational workshop on speaking-up that included rationale, conversational techniques, a rubric for speaking-up, and role-play.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Main Outcomes and Measures

1\. Observed communication in a simulated case that included a surgeon falling asleep during surgery, inappropriate activation of a speakerphone by a nurse, and an incorrect treatment order by a colleague in response to a venous air embolism. 2. Transcribed conversation during a structured debriefing, analyzed for hurdles and enablers.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Faculty, Medical

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Educational Workshop on Speaking-Up

Educational Workshop on Speaking-Up Before Simulated Case

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Educational Workshop on Speaking-Up

Intervention Type OTHER

Educational workshop including lecture, discussion, role-play Concepts include: 2-challenge rule, pairing advocacy and inquiry

Unrelated Education

Unrelated Education (CPR) before simulated case (Educational Workshop on Speaking-up after case and debriefing)

Group Type SHAM_COMPARATOR

Unrelated Education (CPR)

Intervention Type OTHER

Unrelated Education (CPR workshop) including: lecture, discussion Topics covered: Cardiac Life Support algorithms, CPR, Medications

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Educational Workshop on Speaking-Up

Educational workshop including lecture, discussion, role-play Concepts include: 2-challenge rule, pairing advocacy and inquiry

Intervention Type OTHER

Unrelated Education (CPR)

Unrelated Education (CPR workshop) including: lecture, discussion Topics covered: Cardiac Life Support algorithms, CPR, Medications

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Attending Anesthesiologist

Exclusion Criteria

* Prior exposure to test case
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Massachusetts General Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Daniel Raemer, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Anaesthesia

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Daniel B Raemer, Ph.D.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Massachusetts General Hospital

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Massachusetts General Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2008P001015

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Communication in the Surgical Environment
NCT07246226 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA