AzTrials
AzTrials

StressORBLACKBOXNCT07396675

Operating Room Black Box Supported Debriefings and Their Effect on Healthcare Professionals Effectiveness and Psychological Safety.

A study testing Debriefing in people with Stress and Resilience, run by ORNND - Operating Room Nurse Network Denmark at 3 sites in 3 countries.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This study is enrolled in the European KEEPCARING Project. KEEPCARING aims to (re-)build wellbeing and resilience of healthcare workforce in EU hospitals by co-creating a multi-faceted non-digital, digital, and AI-supported solution package to prevent burnout among (aspirant) healthcare professionals on the… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Stress, Resilience, Psychological Safety
What is being tested?
Debriefing
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
135 participants
Where
3 sitesin 3 countries
Study dates
1 Mar 2026to 1 Oct 2027
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Participants work in an OR-team at RIGS, AUMC or UKE.
  • Participants must have given informed written consent to participate in the study.
  • Participants must be in the OR for the majority of the procedure or/and have a central role in the teamwork.
  • At RIGS and AUMC participants for the ORBB debriefings must also be part of teams conducting surgeries in the OR where ORBB is installed (not all ORs have ORBB).
  • Participants can either be surgeons, anesthesiologist, anesthesia nurses, residents, OR-nurses, perfusionists, interns, nurse students or other OR-staff.

Who cannot join

  • Visitors, guests, and other staff only watching the surgery, are excluded from participation.
  • Individuals who are unable or unwilling to provide written informed consent.

Trial locations and contacts

3 sites in 3 countries. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Johanne S Hartmann, RN, MScN contact

+4535450933

johanne.soeborg.hartmann@regionh.dk

Jeanett Strandbygaard, MD, PhD contact

jeanett.strandbygaard@regionh.dk

3 sites in 3 countries

Denmark1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark

    Copenhagen, 2100

    Johanne Søborg Hartmann, RN, MScN, +4535450933, johanne.soeborg.hartmann@regionh.dk

    Jeanett Strandbygaard, MD, PhD, +4535456789, jeanett.strandbygaard@regionh.dk

    Recruiting

Other trials in Denmark

Germany1 site, 1 recruiting
  • University Hospital UKE

    Hamburg

    Laetitia Hampe, MD, l.hampe@uke.de

    Felix Nickel, MD, PhD, Professor, f.nickel@uke.de

    Not yet recruiting

Other trials in Germany

Netherlands1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Amsterdam University Medical Center (Amsterdam UMC)

    Amsterdam

    Anne Feenstra, MD, +31204440267, a.feenstra@amsterdamumc.nl

    Marlies Schijven, MD, PhD, Professor, m.p.schijven@amsterdamumc.nl

    Not yet recruiting

Other trials in Netherlands

About this study

Official title: Improving Postoperative Debriefings: the Added Value of Operating Room Black Box Supported Debriefings and Their Effect on Healthcare Professionals Perceived Effectiveness and Psychological Safety.

This study is enrolled in the European KEEPCARING Project. KEEPCARING aims to (re-)build wellbeing and resilience of healthcare workforce in EU hospitals by co-creating a multi-faceted non-digital, digital, and AI-supported solution package to prevent burnout among (aspirant) healthcare professionals on the individual, team, and organizational level.

This study specifically investigate the operating room staff wellbeing and resilience. The healthcare system is currently struggling to retain and attract operating room personnel. A factor of importance to consider here is occupational stress. If not recognized or mitigated well, occupational stress and personal efficacy can eventually evolve into a syndrome labelled as 'burnout'. In addition, communication and resilience patterns between operating room staff members are of influence, poor and/or inadequate communication among staff may be a factor of stress, compromising their work and wellbeing. In contrast, communication patterns that have a high standard and clarity may support resilience. The ability to speak up and being able to advocate concerns of all team members is of the highest importance here. Indeed, psychological safety and effective teamwork patterns are key for the working environment, performance, patient safety, and job satisfaction. To prevent mistakes during surgery, a safe space where team members can freely speak up is vital.

Read more

To improve psychological safety, and teamwork among OR staff, team debriefing after surgery is known to be effective. What is not known; is whether team debriefing with the additional support derived from audio- and video recordings of the surgery is equally effective as debriefing without.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of structured postoperative debriefings with and without procedural, structured audio- and video recordings, on team performance, psychological safety, and non-technical skills in the operating room. Specifically, this study aims to compare augmented debriefings with non-augmented debriefings, to assess differences in perceived usefulness, psychological safety, and observed improvements in teams' non-technical skills.

This is an international quasi-experimental comparative study. The intervention consists of postoperative team debriefing using audio and video recordings ('augmented debriefing') from Operating Room Black Box system provided by Surgical Safety Technologies. The control group will have a postoperative team debriefing that is not augmented with Operating Room Black Box derived data. An identical debriefing template will be designed for both groups.

Read the detailed description

Design and setting This is an international quasi-experimental comparative study, following the guidelines for complex interventions in health. The intervention will be ORBB augmented team-debriefing after surgery. The control group will debrief after surgery without the assistance of the ORBB. An identical debriefing template has been designed for both groups.

This study will be conducted at OR departments in three university hospitals, located in three different countries: Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital (RIGS), Amsterdam University Medical Center (AUMC) and University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE). RIGS have nine OR's with ORBB installed and access to ORBB-generated video material and outcome reports using explainable AI. AUMC is expected to have two OR's with ORBB installed before beginning of study. RIGS and AUMC are planned as both interventions and control sites, AUMC will if unforeseen delays occur with ORBB installation, be a control site (e.g. have only non-augmented debriefings). UKE does not have ORBB and will be a control site.

Characteristics of the study population

Participants Full OR teams performing elective daytime surgeries, approximately 4-12 people per team. The teams will be selected from a variety of specialties such as cardiothoracic, gynecology, urology, abdominal, vascular, and orthopedic surgery. Depending on the variety and possibility at each site, RIGS, AUMC and UKE, including limitations due to which ORs have ORBB installed.

Intervention Investigators anticipate that the intervention of the study occurs over a 1-month period for each team. In total, the intervention period is scheduled over a one-year period within 2026. During all data collection team members speak in their native language, so for RIGS this is Danish, for AUMC Dutch and for UKE German. The intervention includes a baseline questionnaire, a surgery, a short questionnaire after surgery, an observed debriefing and a follow up questionnaire after surgery.

The intervention set up is the same for teams with and without ORBB, only difference is the audio and video from the ORBB and SST. Furthermore, the debriefings will be audio recorded, and a researcher will observe the sessions. After the intervention period, a sample of participants will be asked to participate in a qualitive interview study.

Preparation before team debriefing After surgery the OR team members individually fill out a short questionnaire. Team members will answer questions about the following four topics: overall procedure, teamwork, safety protocols and learning opportunities.

The key points are wide in their definitions purposely because the team members should have the possibility to choose meaningful moments from the actual OR situation within the four topics. They must answer the questionnaire within 12 hours after surgery, to secure that the OR episode is still fresh in their minds.

Afterwards the researcher on site will review the questionnaires and during non-augmented debriefings bring their answers into play. During augmented debriefings, the researcher will 'flag' the surgery within the SST platform and in collaboration with SST create 2-4 videoclips, that contains the key elements chosen by the team members.

Team debriefing The setup in both augmented and non-augmented debriefings focus on creating a dedicated learning environment that prioritizes reflection, open communication, and psychological safety during the sessions. The physical space is carefully designed to support these critical aspects of team learning and collaboration.

In every debriefing an independent educational specialist (with no formal or working relation to the OR) is used as a moderator that controls the conversation and follow the debriefing template.

During the debriefing a researcher observes the conversation and interactions between team members and the moderator. The observing researcher sits in a corner of the room, disturbing as little as possible, being quiet and only taking field notes of the interaction between the team members and the moderator. The debriefing sessions will be audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim by the observing researcher.

The session is time-limited to 30-60 minutes, balancing comprehensive discussion with efficiency. Critically, the debriefing is ideally conducted after approximately 5 (to a maximum of 21 days) following the surgery, allowing team members sufficient time to process the experience while maintaining the immediacy of relevant insights and reflections emotionally and professionally.

At the same time, securing the researchers a timespan to overview the short questionnaires, and select key points, for the moderator to work with in the debriefing sessions. Specific for the ORBB augmented debriefings, at the same time securing a timespan for the researchers to select and prepare 2-4 videoclips within the ORBB platform in collaboration with SST before the debriefing.

Debriefing template for debriefing In this study investigators implement a six-step team debriefing model, tested with a high rate of participant satisfaction (7.8/10 rating) in a previous study on 35 ORBB augmented abdominal surgery team debriefing sessions. The researchers concluded that their proposed approach effectively facilitates OR debriefing across diverse healthcare settings and provides a viable framework for establishing a much-needed debriefing culture to enhance surgical team performance. Investigators adjusted the model with few moderations to fit both OR debriefings with and without ORBB augmented data, and to include more OR specialties, on top of abdominal OR teams.

During the debriefings the moderator controls the conversation, and every team member represents their field of expertise in the OR. The moderator follows the themes; experience, observation, analyze and application.

During the debriefings all teams will focus on psychological safety and problem solving within the following four key points: overall procedure, teamwork, safety protocols and learning opportunities. For the intervention sites, the debriefing templates are the same as the control site, only add on is the ORBB augmented material of 2-4 videoclips and objective data from SST platform, integrated into the debriefing templates.

Data and Outcomes Investigators will gather data about the debriefings and measure outcomes through the following measurement tools; observation and audio recording of team debriefings, individual pre- and post-debriefing questionnaires and qualitative interviews. Specifically for surgeries using the ORBB system, OR teams will also be observed through audio and video-review from ORBB, including AI statistical data provided by SST.

This will allow for in-depth analysis of team dynamics, providing a structured approach to understanding and improving collaborative practices in surgical settings. By capturing both quantitative ratings and qualitative insights, the research aims to develop targeted strategies that can elevate team communication, psychological safety, and overall performance.

Regulatory and ethics The coordinating hospital for this study is RIGS. In 2019, the Danish Data Protection Agency approved the overall ORBB project (registration no.: VD-2019-275). The project was submitted to the Regional Ethics Committee in 2018, and no ethical approval was needed (registration no.: H-18018801). Additional approval for this debriefing study has been obtained in 2025 from the Regional Legal and Ethics Committee in Copenhagen, Denmark, PRIVACY - legal GRC (ID-NUMBER: p-2025-19044).

Participation in this study is voluntary and thus consent based. All participants will receive oral and written information before entering the study, and they must sign a consent form to participate. Participants can withdraw their consent at any time. Data will be stored on certified servers of Zenodo, which complies with all regulations and applicable laws. Data will also be stored locally in the department's computer system drive.

Being tested
Debriefing
Keywords
debriefing, teamwork, psychological safety, operating room, operating room black box
Medical subject headings
Burnout, Psychological

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • DebriefingBehavioural

    Debriefing after surgery for operating room staff

Study groups in NCT07396675
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Debriefings with Operating Room Black Box audio and video materialOtherOperating Room Black Box audio and video material included in debriefings
Receives: Behavioral: Debriefing
Debriefings without Operating Room Black Box audio and video materialOtherDebriefings without Operating Room Black Box audio and video material
Receives: Behavioral: Debriefing
Observation of team debriefingOtherObservational study part of team member interaction during the team debriefing
Receives: Behavioral: Debriefing
Qualitative interviews after team debriefingOtherQualitative interview study part of team members after debriefing
Receives: Behavioral: Debriefing

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Psychological safety

    Amy Edmondsons Scale on psychological safety and learning behaviour in operating room teams. 7 items scale; minimum value 1, maximum value 5.

    Measured: 1-3 months

  2. Usefulness and satisfaction of the team-debriefing

    Usefulness and satisfaction of the team-debriefing, Van Dalen scale. 6 items score, minimum value 1, maximum value 5.

    Measured: 1-3 months

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Health and quality of life (Validated scale EQ-5D-3L)

    We include the following 3 dimensions from the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system; usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: no problems, some problems, and extreme problems. The participant is asked to indicate his/her health state by ticking the box next to the most appropriate statement in each of the three dimensions.

    Measured: 1-3 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted9 Feb 2026
  2. Study start1 Mar 2026
  3. Primary completion1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
  4. Study completion1 Oct 2027 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Health services research
Allocation
Non-randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
135 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07396675
Sponsor's protocol ID
KEEPCARING EU Debriefing WP3
Acronym
ORBLACKBOX
Status last verified
Jul 2026
First submitted
14 Aug 2025
Last updated
23 Jul 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • The ethnographic interview af James P. Spradley

  • Brinkmann S, Kvale S. Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage; 2003.

  • Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J; RIPPLE Study Team. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ. 2006 Feb 18;332(7538):413-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7538.413.

    PubMed 16484270
  • Rose Gillian. Visual methodologies : an introduction to researching with visual materials. 2023;454.

  • Cook DA, Brydges R, Ginsburg S, Hatala R. A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane's framework. Med Educ. 2015 Jun;49(6):560-75. doi: 10.1111/medu.12678.

    PubMed 25989405
  • Spradley JP. Qualitative Research Guide: Participant Observation. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc

  • Yule S, Flin R, Paterson-Brown S, Maran N, Rowley D. Development of a rating system for surgeons' non-technical skills. Med Educ. 2006 Nov;40(11):1098-104. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02610.x.

    PubMed 17054619
  • Gaba DM. Crisis resource management and teamwork training in anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2010 Jul;105(1):3-6. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq124. No abstract available.

    PubMed 20551023
  • Biesta GJJ, van Braak M. Beyond the Medical Model: Thinking Differently about Medical Education and Medical Education Research. Teach Learn Med. 2020 Aug-Sep;32(4):449-456. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2020.1798240. Epub 2020 Aug 15.

    PubMed 32799696
  • Gadamer HG. Truth and method. Bloomsbury Academic; 1960.

  • Cantor GN, Bhaskar R. The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Philos Q. 1982 Jul;32(128):280.

  • Alvesson Mats, Sköldberg Kaj. Reflexive methodology : new vistas for qualitative research. 2018;437.

  • Cheng A, Eppich W, Grant V, Sherbino J, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2014 Jul;48(7):657-66. doi: 10.1111/medu.12432.

    PubMed 24909527
  • Nembhard IM, Edmondson AC. Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. J Organ Behav

  • Hallberg Ingalill, Richards DA. Complex interventions in health : an overview of research methods

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Debriefing in people with Stress and Resilience, run by ORNND - Operating Room Nurse Network Denmark at 3 sites in 3 countries.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Jul 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 3 sites in Denmark, Germany, Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Johanne S Hartmann, RN, MScN (+4535450933, johanne.soeborg.hartmann@regionh.dk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Psychological safety (time frame: 1-3 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07396675, which also lists 68 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Jul 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in