Improving Anesthesiologists' Ability to Speak Up in the Operating Room: A Randomized Controlled Experiment of a Simulation-Based Intervention and a Qualitative Analysis of Hurdles and Enablers

Purpose The authors addressed three questions: (1) Would a realistic simulation-based educational intervention improve speaking-up behaviors of practicing nontrainee anesthesiologists? (2) What would those speaking-up behaviors be when the issue emanated from a surgeon, a circulating nurse, or an anesthesiologist colleague? (3) What were the hurdles and enablers to speaking up in those situations? Method The authors conducted a simulationbased randomized controlled experiment from March 2008-February 2011 at the Center for Medical Simulation, Boston, Massachusetts. During a mandatory crisis management course for practicing nontrainee anesthesiologists from five Boston institutions, a 50-minute workshop on speaking up was conducted for intervention (n = 35) and control (n = 36) groups before or after, respectively, an experimental scenario with three events. The authors analyzed videos of the experimental scenarios and debriefing sessions. Results No statistically significant differences between the intervention and control group subjects with respect to speakingup actions were observed in any of the three events. The five most frequently mentioned hurdles to speaking up were uncertainty about the issue, stereotypes of others on the team, familiarity with the individual, respect for experience, and the repercussion expected. The five most frequently mentioned enablers were realizing the speaking-up problem, having a speaking-up rubric, certainty about the consequences of speaking up, familiarity with the individual, and having a second opinion or getting help. Conclusions An educational intervention alone was ineffective in improving the speakingup behaviors of practicing nontrainee anesthesiologists. Other measures to change speaking-up behaviors could be implemented and might improve patient safety.