Re‐Validating the Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery Tool (OTAS‐D): Cultural Adaptation, Refinement, and Psychometric Evaluation

Passauer-Baierl, Stefanie; Hull, Louise; Mišković, Danilo; Russ, Stephanie; Sevdalis, Nick; Weigl, Matthias

doi:10.1007/s00268-013-2299-8

Cited by 28 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(64 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The two most commonly used tools were the Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS)34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 52 and the Non‐Technical Skills (NOTECHS) system27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NOTECHS has also been validated in vascular, orthopaedic and general surgery27 28, 31. OTAS also shows evidence of validation in multiple specialties, having been tested in urology, vascular and general surgery, and in operating theatres in Germany34 36, 39.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this, a proportion of OTAS components (behaviours or tasks) were consistently not witnessed in practice12 36, 37. After translation to German operating theatres, inter‐rater agreement also remained poor (κ < 0·40 in 30 per cent of tool items)39. This may be explained by suboptimal team performance, but also casts doubt on its content validity and tool reliability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic review of methods for quantifying teamwork in the operating theatre

Marshall

Sykes

et al. 2018

BJS Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTeamwork in the operating theatre is becoming increasingly recognized as a major factor in clinical outcomes. Many tools have been developed to measure teamwork. Most fall into two categories: self‐assessment by theatre staff and assessment by observers. A critical and comparative analysis of the validity and reliability of these tools is lacking.MethodsMEDLINE and Embase databases were searched following PRISMA guidelines. Content validity was assessed using measurements of inter‐rater agreement, predictive validity and multisite reliability, and interobserver reliability using statistical measures of inter‐rater agreement and reliability. Quantitative meta‐analysis was deemed unsuitable.ResultsForty‐eight articles were selected for final inclusion; self‐assessment tools were used in 18 and observational tools in 28, and there were two qualitative studies. Self‐assessment of teamwork by profession varied with the profession of the assessor. The most robust self‐assessment tool was the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), although this failed to demonstrate multisite reliability. The most robust observational tool was the Non‐Technical Skills (NOTECHS) system, which demonstrated both test–retest reliability (P > 0·09) and interobserver reliability (Rwg = 0·96).ConclusionSelf‐assessment of teamwork by the theatre team was influenced by professional differences. Observational tools, when used by trained observers, circumvented this.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic review of methods for quantifying teamwork in the operating theatre

Marshall

Sykes

et al. 2018

BJS Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Observers and training. Eight of the 13 studies had two observers 75,76,[78][79][80]82,83,85 ; seven involved observers with a clinical background 50,58,77,[79][80][81][82] and six involved observers with a nonclinical background. 50,77,79,80,82,84 Four studies provided a description of observer training.…”

Section: Observational Teamwork Assessment For Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Validity for OTAS was demonstrated in six studies (all of which occurred in an OR). 75,78,[82][83][84][85] These studies demonstrated content validity ( 75,83,85 predictive validity (OTAS-S), 84 concurrent validity (OTAS), 82 and construct validity (OTAS). 78 OTAS was also validated in two other languages (i.e.…”

Section: Observational Teamwork Assessment For Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

Observational Tools That Quantify Nontechnical Skills in the Operating Room: A Systematic Review

McMullan

Urwin

Sunderland

et al. 2020

Journal of Surgical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground: Errors and adverse events in the operating room (OR) are associated with not only poor technical performance but also deficits in nontechnical skills (NTSs). Numerous tools have been developed to assess NTS in the OR. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of observational tools and report on their implementation and psychometric properties to guide healthcare professionals, educators, and researchers in tool selection and use.Methods: A systematic literature search (January 1, 1990eMay 28, 2019) was conducted across databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) and reference lists of included studies. Reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, assessed study quality, and extracted data.Results: Thirty-one tools were identified across 88 studies, most commonly conducted in a real-world OR (n ¼ 50), involving two observers (n ¼ 50). The NTS of individuals (n ¼ 62)were assessed more often than that of subteams (n ¼ 21) or entire teams (n ¼ 20). The NOn-Technical Skills for Surgeons demonstrated content validity, concurrent validity, predictive validity, and face validity across a range of studies. Oxford NOn-TECHnical Skills demonstrated content validity, concurrent validity, and predictive validity with good inter-rater reliability and test-retest validity. Conclusions:The NOn-Technical Skills for Surgeons has the strongest evidence of validity and reliability for assessing individuals, whereas the most robust tool for evaluating teams was Oxford NOn-TECHnical Skills. We recommend continued investigation of these observational tools regarding their feasibility and reproducibility of methods. Further research is needed to determine the training requirements for observers and the potential of video and audio recordings in the OR. CrownThe operating room (OR) is a complex, high-risk environment in which many factors influence team performance and patient safety. The complexity that is manifested within and across the patient, procedure, equipment, team, and culture increases the likelihood of adverse events. 1 It has been estimated that approximately 40% to 65% of all in-hospital ScienceDirect jo urnal homepage: www.J ou rn alofS urgicalR esearch.com j o u r n a l o f s u r g i c a l r e s e a r c h m a r c h 2 0 2 0 ( 2 4 7 ) 3 0 6 e3 2 2

show abstract

Teamwork and healthcare simulation

Weller¹,

Civil

2017

Healthcare Simulation Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Re‐Validating the Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery Tool (OTAS‐D): Cultural Adaptation, Refinement, and Psychometric Evaluation

Cited by 28 publications

References 36 publications

Systematic review of methods for quantifying teamwork in the operating theatre

Systematic review of methods for quantifying teamwork in the operating theatre

Observational Tools That Quantify Nontechnical Skills in the Operating Room: A Systematic Review

Teamwork and healthcare simulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About