Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 393

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effects of aviation-style non-technical skills training on technical performance and outcome in the operating theatre

Open access
McCulloch, P, Mishra, A, Handa, A, Dale, T, Hirst, G, Catchpole, K·2009·Quality and Safety in Health Care

Abstract

Unintended harm to patients in operating theatres is common. Correlations have been demonstrated between teamwork skills and error rates in theatres. This was a single-institution uncontrolled before-after study of the effects of "non-technical" skills training on attitudes, teamwork, technical performance and clinical outcome in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) operations. The setting was the theatre suite of a UK teaching hospital. Attitudes were measured using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ). Teamwork was scored using the Oxford Non-Technical Skills (NOTECHS) method. Operative technical errors (OTEs), non-operative procedural errors (NOPEs), complications, operating time and length of hospital stay (LOS) were recorded. A 9 h classroom non-technical skills course based on aviation "Crew Resource Management" (CRM) was offered to all staff, followed by 3 months of twice-weekly coaching from CRM experts. Forty-eight procedures (26 LC and 22 CEA) were studied before intervention, and 55 (32 and 23) afterwards. Non-technical skills and attitudes improved after training (NOTECHS increase 37.0 to 38.7, t = -2.35, p = 0.021, SAQ teamwork climate increase 64.1 to 69.2, t = -2.95, p = 0.007). OTEs declined from 1.73 to 0.98 (u = 1071, p = 0.009), and NOPEs from 8.48 to 5.16 per operation (t = 4.383, p<0.001). These effects were stronger in the LC group than in CEA procedures. The operating time was unchanged, and a non-significant reduction in LOS was observed. Non-technical skills training improved technical performance in theatre, but the effects varied between teams. Considerable cultural resistance to adoption was encountered, particularly among medical staff. Debriefing and challenging authority seemed more difficult to introduce than other parts of the training. Further studies are needed to define the optimal training package, explain variable responses and confirm clinical benefit.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/qshc.2008.032045

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 393

Metadata

Authors
McCulloch, P., Mishra, A., Handa, A., Dale, T., Hirst, G., & Catchpole, K.
Venue
Quality and Safety in Health Care
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-04-01
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
109-115
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-3901
OpenAlex
W2008146874
Cited by
393
References
29
FWCI
34.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The effects of aviation-style non-technical skills training on technical performance and outcome in the operating theatre. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/qshc.2008.032045
The paper
McCulloch, P., Mishra, A., Handa, A., Dale, T., Hirst, G., & Catchpole, K. (2009). The effects of aviation-style non-technical skills training on technical performance and outcome in the operating theatre. Quality and Safety in Health Care. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2008.032045

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.