266 - Exploring the Benefits of Integrating Operating Rooms in the United States

Description:

Background: Inefficiencies in operating room workflow and communication are well-documented contributors to surgical delays, staff burnout, and patient safety risks. Integrated operating room (iORs) have the potential to optimize surgical processes by harmonizing various systems under the control of a single console terminal and moving many pieces of equipment from floor carts to overhead boom arms.

Purpose: The aim of this research was to evaluate how implementing iORs at hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) in the United States may affect workflow efficiency, intraoperative communication, and perioperative team satisfaction.

Methods: A Web survey of 150 perioperative surgical personnel at U.S. healthcare facilities with at least one iOR was conducted in February 2024 to identify the operational and safety advantages associated with iORs compared to non-iORs. An iOR was defined as a dynamic operating room better facilitating minimally invasive (MIS) surgical procedures by utilizing a variety of technologies and room designs. At a minimum, iORs feature boom-mounted MIS hardware components and integration of lights, AV technology, insufflation, and IT systems via a computer(s) operated by a circulator assigned to the room during a case. A non-iOR lacks these minimum requirements and may still use cart-based laparoscopic towers and/or lacks data integration among devices/systems.

Results: Approximately half the respondents (n=75) held managerial roles, 30% (n=45) were surgical nurses, technologists, or assistants, and 20% (n=30) were surgeons; 20% (n=30) worked at ASCs while 80% (n=120) worked at academic, community, and government acute care hospitals providing surgical services. Compared to non-iORs, most respondents agreed that iORs are considered standard-of-care for performing surgery today (68%), are important for driving profitability of surgical services (59%), and offer better visibility of images on the surgical displays during procedure (68%), automated control of lights in the OR (68%), and insufflation (67%). Specifically, clinicians believed iORs provided efficiencies in areas such as image management (67%), workflow via interactive/touchscreen displays (63%), connectivity and collaboration across facilities (69%), data management (68%), and integration with robotic systems (54%) and hospital staff agreed that iORs, on average, had 41% fewer injuries than non-iORs. Additional benefits include substantial time savings, with iORs estimated to achieve 9% shorter average surgical case lengths, 8% higher average on-time start rates, and 17% faster turnover and set-up times compared to non-iORs.

Conclusion: Survey responses indicate that the benefits of integrating operating rooms align with important goals of surgical services departments. Perioperative leaders are encouraged to invest in the technological transformation of their ORs into iORs to enhance their institution's operational efficiency and improve staff and patient safety.