A challenge-response endoscopic sinus surgery specific checklist as an add-on to standard surgical checklist: an evaluation of potential safety and quality improvement issues.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to develop and evaluate the impact of an aviation-style challenge and response sinus surgery-specific checklist on potential safety and equipment issues during sinus surgery at a tertiary academic health center. The secondary goal was to assess the potential impact of use of the checklist on surgical times during, before, and after surgery. This initiative is designed to be utilized in conjunction with the "standard" World Health Organization (WHO) surgical checklist. Although endoscopic sinus surgery is generally considered a safe procedure, avoidable complications and potential safety concerns continue to occur. The WHO surgical checklist does not directly address certain surgery-specific issues, which may be of particular relevance for endoscopic sinus surgery. METHODS: This prospective observational pilot study monitored compliance with and compared the occurrence of safety and equipment issues before and after implementation of the checklist. Forty-seven consecutive endoscopic surgeries were audited; the first 8 without the checklist and the following 39 with the checklist. The checklist was compiled by evaluating the patient journey, utilizing the available literature, expert consensus, and finally reevaluation with audit type cases. The final checklist was developed with all relevant stakeholders involved in a Delphi method. RESULTS: Implementing this specific surgical checklist in 39 cases at our institution, allowed us to identify and rectify 35 separate instances of potentially unsafe, improper or inefficient preoperative setup. These incidents included issues with labeling of topical vasoconstrictor or injectable anesthetics (3, 7.7%) and availability, function and/or position of video monitors (2, 5.1%), endoscope (6, 15.4%), microdebrider (6, 15.4%), bipolar cautery (6, 15.4%), and suctions (12, 30.8%). CONCLUSION: The design and integration of this checklist for endoscopic sinus surgery, has helped improve efficiency and patient safety in the operating room setting.

Primary care physician referral patterns in Ontario, Canada: a descriptive analysis of self-reported referral data.

BACKGROUND: In many countries, the referral-consultation process faces a number of challenges from inefficiencies and rising demand, resulting in excessive wait times for many specialties. We collected referral data from a sample of family doctors across the province of Ontario, Canada as part of a larger program of research. The purpose of this study is to describe referral patterns from primary care to specialist and allied health services from the primary care perspective. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of patient referral data submitted by primary care providers (PCP) from 20 clinics across Ontario between June 2014 and January 2016. Monthly referral volumes expressed as a total number of referrals to all medical and allied health professionals per month. For each referral, we also collected data on the specialty type, reason for referral, and whether the referral was for a procedure. RESULTS: PCPs submitted a median of 26 referrals per month (interquartile range 11.5 to 31.8). Of 9509 referrals eligible for analysis, 97.8% were directed to medical professionals and 2.2% to allied health professionals. 55% of medical referrals were directed to non-surgical specialties and 44.8% to surgical specialties. Medical referrals were for procedures in 30.8% of cases and non-procedural in 40.9%. Gastroenterology received the largest share (11.2%) of medical referrals, of which 62.3% were for colonoscopies. Psychology received the largest share (28.3%) of referrals to allied health professionals. CONCLUSION: We described patterns of patient referral from primary care to specialist and allied health services for 30 PCPs in 20 clinics across Ontario. Gastroenterology received the largest share of referrals, nearly two-thirds of which were for colonoscopies. Future studies should explore the use of virtual care to help manage non-procedural referrals and examine the impact that procedural referrals have on wait times for gastroenterology.

Morphine or Ibuprofen for post-tonsillectomy analgesia: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric sleep disordered breathing is often caused by hypertrophy of the tonsils and is commonly managed by tonsillectomy. There is controversy regarding which postsurgical analgesic agents are safe and efficacious. METHODS: This prospective randomized clinical trial recruited children who had sleep disordered breathing who were scheduled for tonsillectomy +/- adenoid removal. Parents were provided with a pulse oximeter to measure oxygen saturation and apnea events the night before and the night after surgery. Children were randomized to receive acetaminophen with either 0.2-0.5 mg/kg oral morphine or 10 mg/kg of oral ibuprofen. The Objective Pain Scale and Faces Scale were used to assess effectiveness on postoperative day 1 and day 5. The primary endpoint was changes in respiratory parameters during sleep. RESULTS: A total of 91 children aged 1 to 10 years were randomized. On the first postoperative night, with respect to oxygen desaturations, 86% of children did not show improvement in the morphine group, whereas 68% of ibuprofen patients did show improvement (14% vs 68%; P < .01). The number of desaturation events increased substantially in the morphine group, with an average increase of 11.17 ± 15.02 desaturation events per hour (P < .01). There were no differences seen in analgesic effectiveness, tonsillar bleeding, or adverse drug reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Ibuprofen in combination with acetaminophen provides safe and effective analgesia in children undergoing tonsillectomy. Post-tonsillectomy morphine use should be limited, as it may be unsafe in certain children.