Interdisciplinary survey reveals communication gaps and incidents related to gender discrimination in the OR, suggesting improvements for safety.
Objective: Effective communication between surgeons and anesthesiologists in the operating room (OR) is essential for patient safety, but communication deficits remain a leading cause of medical errors. Methods: An anonymous, interdisciplinary online survey was conducted to assess communication in the OR at a single university hospital. The target population included all surgeons and anesthesiologists, regardless of career level (n=837). The questionnaire consisted of 28 items covering 5 thematic domains. It was distributed via email and available from January to March 2024. No incentives were provided. Data were analyzed descriptively and comparatively using the χ 2 test. Results: A total of 183 participants (55% anesthesiologists, 45% surgeons) were eligible. A desire for more or substantially more communication in the OR was expressed by 67% of respondents. Preventable incidences caused by communication deficits were reported by 65% of participants, with anesthesiologists being significantly more likely to report both. Gender-based discrimination in the OR was experienced by 36% of respondents with both anesthesiologists and female physicians being significantly more often affected. Conclusions: This interdisciplinary survey revealed communication gaps, preventable incidents linked to poor communication, and perceived gender-based discrimination between anesthesiologists and surgeons in the OR. Sixty-five percent of respondents link these deficits to preventable patient safety incidents. These results can serve as an exemplary case for similar hospital organizations or acute care settings and help promote gender equality. These findings underscore the need for respectful dialogue and strong interdisciplinary collaboration in operating rooms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trinks et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: