↓ Skip to main content

Interprofessional work in operating rooms: a qualitative study from Sri Lanka

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interprofessional work in operating rooms: a qualitative study from Sri Lanka
Published in
BMC Surgery, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12893-016-0177-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vathsala Jayasuriya-Illesinghe, Sepali Guruge, Bawantha Gamage, Sherry Espin

Abstract

A growing body of research shows links between poor teamwork and preventable surgical errors. Similar work has received little attention in the Global South, and in South Asia, in particular. This paper describes surgeons' perception of teamwork, team members' roles, and the team processes in a teaching hospital in Sri Lanka to highlight the nature of interprofessional teamwork and the factors that influence teamwork in this setting. Data gathered from interviews with 15 surgeons were analyzed using a conceptual framework for interprofessional teamwork. Interprofessional teamwork was characterized by low levels of interdependency and integration of work. The demarcation of roles and responsibilities for surgeons, nurses, and anesthetists appeared to be a strong element of interprofessional teamwork in this setting. Various relational factors, such as, professional power, hierarchy, and socialization, as well as contextual factors, such as, patriarchy and gender norms influenced interprofessional collaboration, and created barriers to communication between surgeons and nurses. Junior surgeons derived their understanding of appropriate practices mainly from observing senior surgeons, and there was a lack of formal training opportunities and motivation to develop non-technical skills that could improve interprofessional teamwork in operating rooms. A more nuanced view of interprofessional teamwork can highlight the different elements of such work suited for each specific setting. Understanding the relational and contextual factors related to and influencing interprofessional socialization and status hierarchies can help improve quality of teamwork, and the training and mentoring of junior members.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 64 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 9%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 28%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 14 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,136,680
of 8,854,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#100
of 343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,448
of 255,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#3
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,854,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 52nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 343 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,505 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.