Compliance with a time-out procedure intended to prevent wrong surgery in hospitals: results of a national patient safety programme in the Netherlands.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To prevent wrong surgery, the WHO 'Safe Surgery Checklist' was introduced in 2008. The checklist comprises a time-out procedure (TOP): the final step before the start of the surgical procedure where the patient, surgical procedure and side/site are reviewed by the surgical team. The aim of this study is to evaluate the extent to which hospitals carry out the TOP before anaesthesia in the operating room, whether compliance has changed over time, and to determine factors that are associated with compliance. DESIGN:Evaluation study involving observations. SETTING:Operating rooms of 2 academic, 4 teaching and 12 general Dutch hospitals. PARTICIPANTS:A random selection was made from all adult patients scheduled for elective surgery on the day of the observation, preferably involving different surgeons and different procedures. RESULTS:Mean compliance with the TOP was 71.3%. Large differences between hospitals were observed. No linear trend was found in compliance during the study period. Compliance at general and teaching hospitals was higher than at academic hospitals. Compliance decreased with the age of the patient, general surgery showed lower compliance in comparison with other specialties and compliance was higher when the team was focused on the TOP. CONCLUSIONS:Large differences in compliance with the TOP were observed between participating hospitals which can be attributed at least in part to the type of hospital, surgical specialty and patient characteristics. Hospitals do not comply consistently with national guidelines to prevent wrong surgery and further implementation as well as further research into non-compliance is needed.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Although the surgical pause or time-out is a required part of most hospitals' standard operating procedures, little is known about the quality of execution of the time-out in routine clinical practice. An interactive electronic time-out was implemented to increase surgical team compliance with the time-out procedure and to improve communication among team members in the operating room. We sought to identify nonroutine events that occur during the time-out procedure in the operating room, including distractions and interruptions, deviations from protocol, and the problem-solving strategies used by operating room team members to mitigate them. METHODS:Direct observations of surgical time-outs were performed on 166 nonemergent surgeries in 2016. For each time-out, the observers recorded compliance with each step, any nonroutine events that may have occurred, and whether any operating room team members were distracted. RESULTS:The time-out procedure was performed before the first incision in 100% of cases. An announcement was made to indicate the start of the time-out procedure in 163 of 166 observed surgeries. Most observed time-outs were completed in <1 minute. Most time-outs were completed without interruption (92.8%). The most common reason for an interruption was to verify patient information. Ten time-out procedures were stopped due to a safety concern. At least 1 member of the operating room team was actively distracted in 10.2% of the time-out procedures observed. CONCLUSIONS:Compliance with preincision time-outs is high at our institution, and nonroutine events are a rare occurrence. It is common for ?1 member of the operating room team to be actively distracted during time-out procedures, even though most time-outs are completed in under 1 minute. Despite distractions, there were no wrong-site or wrong-person surgeries reported at our hospital during the study period. We conclude that the simple act of performing a preprocedure checklist may be completed quickly, but that distractions are common.
Project description:<h4>Unlabelled</h4><h4>Background</h4>Even though the use of perioperative checklists have resulted in significant reduction in postoperative mortality and morbidity, as well as improvements of important information communication, the utilization of checklists seems to vary, and perceived barriers are likely to influence compliance. In this grounded theory study we aimed to explore the challenges and strategies of performing the WHO's Safe Surgical Checklist as experienced by the nurses appointed as checklist coordinators.<h4>Methods</h4>Grounded theory was used in gathering and analyzing data from observations of the checklist used in the operating room, in conjunction with single and focus group interviews. A purposeful sample of 14 nurse-anesthetists and operating room nurses as surgical team members in a tertiary teaching hospital participated in the study.<h4>Results</h4>The nurses' main concern regarding checklist utilization was identified as "how to obtain professional and social acceptance within the team". The emergent grounded theory of "adjusting team involvement" consisted of three strategies; distancing, moderating and engaging team involvement. The use of these strategies explains how they resolved their challenges. Each strategy had corresponding conditions and consequences, determining checklist compliance, and how the checklist was used.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Even though nurses seem to have a loyal attitude towards the WHO's checklist regarding their task work, they adjusted their surgical team involvement according to practical, social and professional conditions in their work environment. This might have resulted in the incomplete use of the checklist and therefore a low compliance rate. Findings also emphasized the importance of: a) management support when implementing WHO's Safe Surgical Checklist, and b) interprofessional education approach to local adaptation of the checklists use.
Project description:<h4>Aims</h4>Participation in wrong-site surgery may negatively influence the perception of safety by the health care professionals in the operating room (OR). The objective was to explore if perception of safety in the OR was seen as a team-based or individualist concern and whether having participated in wrong-site surgery was associated with perception of safety.<h4>Method and results</h4>Cross-sectional survey at 2 annual meetings of surgery, in Switzerland, 2010. We used multivariate generalized models to assess the association of perception of safety in the OR (1 item) with self-reported participation in wrong-site surgery-overall, past (more than 3 y ago), or recent (last 3 y) participations-controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and opinion of the surgical safety checklist. One hundred ninety respondents answered the questionnaire (participation rate of 22.6%). Respondents mostly had a team-based, rather than an individualistic, perception of safety in the OR. In multivariate analyses, the influence of ever participation in wrong-site surgery was not significant. However, past participation in wrong-site surgery (more than 3 y ago) was associated with perception of safety as team based, whereas recent participation (last 3 y) was associated-despite not significant at ? ? 5%-with perception of safety as individualistic.<h4>Conclusion</h4>In this sample, safety in the OR is most often seen as team based rather than individualistic. Perceiving safety in the OR as team based varies according to recent or past participation in wrong-site surgery. Longitudinal research is needed to assess causality between participation in wrong-site surgery and change in perception of safety.
Project description:PURPOSE: The World Health Organisation (WHO) identified patient safety in surgery as an important public health matter and advised the adoption of a universal peri-operative surgical checklist. An adapted version of the WHO checklist has been mandatory in the National Health Service since 2010. Wrong intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is a particular safety concern in ophthalmology. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists launched a bespoke checklist for cataract surgery in 2010 to reduce the likelihood of preventable errors. We sought to ascertain the use of checklists in cataract surgery in 2012. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A survey of members of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists seeking views on the use of checklists in cataract surgery. Four hundred and sixty-nine completed responses were received (18% response rate). RESULTS: Respondents worked in England (75%), Scotland (11%), Wales (5%), Northern Ireland (2%), the Republic of Ireland (1%), and overseas (6%). Ninety-four per cent of respondents support the use of a checklist for cataract surgery and 85% say that they always use a checklist before cataract surgery. Sixty-seven per cent of cataract surgeons stated they undertake a pre-operative team brief. Thirty-six per cent use a cataract surgery checklist developed locally, 18% use the college's bespoke cataract surgery checklist, 39% use a generic surgical checklist, and 4% reported that they do not use a checklist. CONCLUSION: Ninety-three per cent of cataract surgeons responding to the questionnaire report using a surgical checklist and 67% use a team brief. However, only 54% use a checklist, which addresses the selection of the correct intraocular implant. We recommend wider adoption of checklists, which address risks relevant to cataract surgery, in particular the possibility of selection of an incorrect IOL.
Project description:Mortality from anaesthesia and surgery in many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa remain at levels last seen in high-income countries 70 years ago. With many factors contributing to these poor outcomes, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the "Safe Surgery Saves Lives" campaign in 2007. This program included the design and implementation of the "Surgical Safety Checklist", incorporating ten essential objectives for safe surgery. We set out to determine the knowledge of and attitudes towards the use of the WHO checklist for surgical patients in national referral hospitals in East Africa.A cross-sectional survey was conducted at the main referral hospitals in Mulago (Uganda), Kenyatta (Kenya), Muhimbili (Tanzania), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Kigali (Rwanda) and Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Kamenge (Burundi). Using a pre-set questionnaire, we interviewed anaesthetists on their knowledge and attitudes towards use of the WHO surgical checklist.Of the 85 anaesthetists interviewed, only 25 % regularly used the WHO surgical checklist. None of the anaesthetists in Mulago (Uganda) or Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Kamenge (Burundi) used the checklist, mainly because it was not available, in contrast with Muhimbili (Tanzania), Kenyatta (Kenya), and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Kigali (Rwanda), where 65 %, 19 % and 36 %, respectively, used the checklist.Adherence to aspects of care embedded in the checklist is associated with a reduction in postoperative complications. It is therefore necessary to make the surgical checklist available, to train the surgical team on its importance and to identify local anaesthetists to champion its implementation in East Africa. The Ministries of Health in the participating countries need to issue directives for the implementation of the WHO checklist in all hospitals that conduct surgery in order to improve surgical outcomes.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Surgical procedures are now very common, with estimates ranging from 4% of the general population having an operation per annum in economically-developing countries; this rising to 8% in economically-developed countries. Whilst these surgical procedures typically result in considerable improvements to health outcomes, it is increasingly appreciated that surgery is a high risk industry. Tools developed in the aviation industry are beginning to be used to minimise the risk of errors in surgery. One such tool is the World Health Organization's (WHO) surgery checklist. The National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) manages the largest database of patient safety incidents (PSIs) in the world, already having received over three million reports of episodes of care that could or did result in iatrogenic harm. The aim of this study was to estimate how many incidents of wrong site surgery in orthopaedics that have been reported to the NPSA could have been prevented by the WHO surgical checklist.<h4>Methods</h4>The National Reporting and Learning Service (NRLS) database was searched between 1st January 2008- 31st December 2008 to identify all incidents classified as wrong site surgery in orthopaedics. These incidents were broken down into the different types of wrong site surgery. A Likert-scale from 1-5 was used to assess the preventability of these cases if the checklist was used.<h4>Results</h4>133/316 (42%) incidents satisfied the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of cases, 183/316 were misclassified. Furthermore, there were fewer cases of actual harm [9% (12/133)] versus 'near-misses' [121/133 (91%)]. Subsequent analysis revealed a smaller proportion of 'near-misses' being prevented by the checklist than the proportion of incidents that resulted in actual harm; 18/121 [14.9% (95% CI 8.5-21.2%)] versus 10/12 [83.3% (95%CI 62.2-104.4%)] respectively. Summatively, the checklist could have been prevented 28/133 [21.1% (95%CI 14.1-28.0%)] patient safety incidents.<h4>Discussion</h4>Orthopaedic surgery is a high volume specialty with major technical complexity in terms of equipment demands and staff training and familiarity. There is therefore an increased propensity for errors to occur. Wrong-site surgery still occurs in this specialty and is a potentially devastating situation for both the patient and surgeon. Despite the limitations of inclusion and reporting bias, our study highlights the need to match technical precision with patient safety. Tools such as the WHO surgical checklist can help us to achieve this.
Project description:BACKGROUND: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist has a growing evidence base to support its role in improving perioperative safety, although its impact is likely to be directly related to the effectiveness of its implementation. There remains a paucity of documented experience from low-resource settings on Checklist implementation approaches. We report an implementation strategy in a public referral hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, based on consultation, local leadership, formal introduction, and supported supervision with subsequent audit and feedback. METHODS: Planning, implementation and assessment took place from December 2011 to December 2012. The planning phase, from December 2011 until April 2012, involved a multidisciplinary consultative approach using local leaders, volunteer clinicians, and staff from non-governmental organisations, to draw up a locally agreed and appropriate Checklist. Implementation in April 2012 involved formal teaching and discussion, simulation sessions and role play, with supportive supervision following implementation. Assessment was performed using completed Checklist analysis and staff satisfaction questionnaires at one month and further Checklist analysis combined with semi-structured interviews in December 2012. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Checklist compliance rates were 83% for general anaesthetics at one month after implementation, with an overall compliance rate of 65% at eight months. There was a decrease in Checklist compliance over the period of the study to less than 20% by the end of the study period. The 'Sign out' section was reported as being the most difficult section of the Checklist to complete, and was missed completely in 21% of cases. The most commonly missed single item was the team introduction at the start of each case. However, we report high staff satisfaction with the Checklist and enthusiasm for its continued use. CONCLUSION: We report a detailed implementation strategy for introducing the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist to a low-resource setting. We show that this approach can lead to high completion rates and high staff satisfaction, albeit with a drop in completion rates over time. We argue that maximal benefit of the Surgical Safety Checklist is likely to be when it engenders a conversation around patient safety within a department, and when there is local ownership of this process.
Project description:Mafraq Hospital performs an average of 10,000 surgeries every year. The impact of having high volume high risk surgical procedures calls for the need to ensure safe surgery and a prevention of surgical site infection (SSI). SSI represents a significant portion of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The impact on morbidity, mortality, and cost of care has resulted in identifying the need to reduce SSI as a top priority to prevent healthcare associated infections. The good news is that the majority of SSIs are preventable. Mafraq Hospital performs a range of surgical procedures that covers 14 surgical specialties. The infection prevention and control team performs surveillance for SSI for all patients who undergo operative procedure included in Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Operative Procedure Category (40 surgical procedures). Out of the 40 CDC NHSN listed, 33 operative procedures were performed at Mafraq Hospital, of which 17 were reported with SSI for 2013 and 2014. Surgical site infection has implicated an increase average length of stay from seven to 10 additional postoperative hospital days and additional costs of AED 10,000 to AED 100,000/SSI depending on procedure and pathogen. A multidisciplinary team was formed to develop and implement measures to reduce/eliminate surgical site infection, as well as evaluate and monitor compliance. Hence a group of multidisciplinary teams were initiated to analyse the results, find out the gaps, and implement a quality improvement project to correct the deficits. Recommendations for appropriate improvement measures were formed on evidence-based international guidelines from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) and CDC. Evidence based practice supports that many of the causes of surgical site infection can be prevented with proper medical attention and care.
Project description:<h4>Importance</h4>Compliance with the surgical safety checklist during operative procedures has been shown to reduce inhospital mortality and complications but proper execution by the surgical team remains elusive.<h4>Objective</h4>We evaluated the impact of remote video auditing with real-time provider feedback on checklist compliance during sign-in, time-out and sign-out and case turnover times.<h4>Design, setting</h4>Prospective, cluster randomised study in a 23-operating room (OR) suite.<h4>Participants</h4>Surgeons, anaesthesia providers, nurses and support staff.<h4>Exposure</h4>ORs were randomised to receive, or not receive, real-time feedback on safety checklist compliance and efficiency metrics via display boards and text messages, followed by a period during which all ORs received feedback.<h4>Main outcomes and measures</h4>Checklist compliance (Pass/Fail) during sign-in, time-out and sign-out demonstrated by (1) use of checklist, (2) team attentiveness, (3) required duration, (4) proper sequence and duration of case turnover times.<h4>Results</h4>Sign-in, time-out and sign-out PASS rates increased from 25%, 16% and 32% during baseline phase (n=1886) to 64%, 84% and 68% for feedback ORs versus 40%, 77% and 51% for no-feedback ORs (p<0.004) during the intervention phase (n=2693). Pass rates were 91%, 95% and 84% during the all-feedback phase (n=2001). For scheduled cases (n=1406, 71%), feedback reduced mean turnover times by 14% (41.4?min vs 48.1?min, p<0.004), and the improvement was sustained during the all-feedback period. Feedback had no effect on turnover time for unscheduled cases (n=587, 29%).<h4>Conclusions and relevance</h4>Our data indicate that remote video auditing with feedback improves surgical safety checklist compliance for all cases, and turnover time for scheduled cases, but not for unscheduled cases.
Project description:OBJECTIVES: To examine the implementation of the Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) among surgeons and anaesthetists working in Swiss hospitals and clinics and their perceptions of the SSC. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey at the 97th Annual Meeting of the Swiss Society of Surgery, Switzerland, 2010. Opinions of the SSC were assessed with a 6-item questionnaire. RESULTS: 152 respondents answered the questionnaire (participation rate 35.1%). 64.7% respondents acknowledged having a checklist in their hospital or their clinic. Median implementation year was 2009. More than 8 out of 10 respondents reported their team applied the Sign In and the Time Out very often or quasi systematically, whereas almost half of respondents acknowledged the Sign Out was applied never or rarely. The majority of respondents agreed that the checklist improves safety and team communication, and helps to develop a safety culture. However, they were less supportive about the opinion that the checklist facilitates teamwork and eliminates social hierarchy between caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: This survey indicates that the SSC has been largely implemented in many Swiss hospitals and clinics. Both surgeons and anaesthetists perceived the SSC as a valuable tool in improving intraoperative patient safety and communication among health care professionals, with lesser importance in facilitating teamwork (and eliminating hierarchical categories).