Effective Surgical Safety Checklist Implementation

Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Journal of the American College of Surgeons (Impact Factor: 4.45). 03/2011; 212(5):873-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.01.052
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Research suggests that surgical safety checklists can reduce mortality and other postoperative complications. The real world impact of surgical safety checklists on patient outcomes, however, depends on the effectiveness of hospitals' implementation processes.
We studied implementation processes in 5 Washington State hospitals by conducting semistructured interviews with implementation leaders and surgeons from September to December 2009. Interviews were transcribed, analyzed, and compared with findings from previous implementation research to identify factors that distinguish effective implementation.
Qualitative analysis suggested that effectiveness hinges on the ability of implementation leaders to persuasively explain why and adaptively show how to use the checklist. Coordinated efforts to explain why the checklist is being implemented and extensive education regarding its use resulted in buy-in among surgical staff and thorough checklist use. When implementation leaders did not explain why or show how the checklist should be used, staff neither understood the rationale behind implementation nor were they adequately prepared to use the checklist, leading to frustration, disinterest, and eventual abandonment despite a hospital-wide mandate.
The impact of surgical safety checklists on patient outcomes is likely to vary with the effectiveness of each hospital's implementation process. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and reveal additional factors supportive of checklist implementation.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Surgical checklists are designed to improve patient outcomes following surgery. While such checklists have been widely implemented worldwide, few studies examine surgical checklists within an Australian context. For this purpose, we have performed a literature review using data from OECD member nations to determine the effectiveness of surgical checklists in improving patient outcomes and factors that contribute to their successful implementation. METHOD: The databases, Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane and CINAHL were searched using the keywords ('surgical' AND 'checklist') and ( (surgical) AND checklist) AND ( (implementation) OR (utilization) OR (usage) ). Studies were limited to those written in the English language, peer-reviewed, published between January 2000 and December 2012, and including an abstract. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2242 papers, of which 72 papers were identified for their potential relevance and selected for full text review. Of these, nine papers met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed in detail. Evidence that supports the use of surgical checklists in countries with a large number of protocols already in place is limited. Adequate checklist implementation plays a central role in checklist effectiveness, which in turn is dependent on multiple factors. CONCLUSION: Although evidence from OECD member countries is non-conclusive, it does suggest that surgical checklists, when effectively implemented, have the potential to be effective at reducing complication and mortality rates following surgery. Within an Australian context, more studies are needed to fully establish the potential effectiveness of surgical checklists and to monitor checklist use compliance in order to ensure greater patient safety.
    ANZ Journal of Surgery 04/2013; DOI:10.1111/ans.12168 · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Safety Checklist concept has been an integral part of many industries that face high-complexity tasks for many decades and in industries such as aviation and engineering checklists have evolved from their very inception. Investigations of the causes of surgical deaths around the world have repeatedly pointed to medical errors that could be prevented as an important cause of death and disability. As a result, the World Health Organisation developed and evaluated a three-stage surgical checklist in 2007 demonstrating that complications were significantly reduced, including surgical infection rates and even mortality. Together with the results from other large cohort studies into the utility of the surgical checklist, many countries have fully implemented the use of surgical checklists into routine practice. A key factor in the successful implementation of a surgical checklist is engagement of the staff implementing the checklist. In surgical specialties such as our own it was quickly seen that there were many important omissions in the generic checklist that did not cover issues particular to our specialty, and thus the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery embarked on a process to create a version of the checklist that might be more appropriate and specific to cardiothoracic surgery, including checks on preparations for excessive bleeding, perfusion arrangements and ICU preparations, for example. The guideline presented here summarizes the evidence for the surgical checklist and also goes through in detail the changes recommended for our specialty.
    European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery 03/2012; 41(5):993-1004. DOI:10.1093/ejcts/ezs009 · 2.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Surgical safety checklists (SSCs) are designed to improve team communication and consistency in care, ultimately avoiding complications. In Colorado, hospitals reported that use of SSCs was standard practice, but a statewide survey indicated that SSC use was inconsistent. The purpose of this project was to directly observe the compliance with the SSC in Colorado hospitals, through direct observation of the perioperative checklist process. Ten hospitals participated in a quality improvement initiative. Trained team members recorded compliance with each of the components of the SSC. Data analysis was performed using a chi-squared test or ANOVA, depending on the number of categorical variables, with p < 0.05 determining statistical significance. Ten hospitals representing statewide diversity submitted 854 observations (median 98, range 24-106). 83% of cases were elective, 13% urgent, and 4% emergent/trauma. There was significant variation across hospitals in: team introductions, cessation of activity, affirming correct procedure, assessing hypothermia risk, need for beta blocker, or VTE prophylaxis. Uniformly poor compliance was observed with respect to assessment of case duration, blood loss, anesthesiologists' concerns, or display of essential imaging. Only 71% of observers reported active participation by physicians; 9% reported that "the majority did not pay attention" and 4% reported that the team was "just going through the motions". There were significant differences among surgical specialty groups in the majority of the elements. SSCs have been implemented by the vast majority of hospitals in our state; however, compliance with SSC completion in the operating room has wide variation and is generally suboptimal. Although this study was not designed to correlate SSC compliance with outcomes, there are concerns about the risk of a sentinel event or unanticipated complication resulting from poor preparation.
    Patient Safety in Surgery 12/2015; 9(1):5. DOI:10.1186/s13037-014-0056-z