A mixed methods study of challenges in the implementation and use of the surgical safety checklist.

BACKGROUND: The surgical safety checklist is an evidence-based global initiative designed to reduce perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, the expounded benefits of the surgical safety checklist have not been realized in naturalistic settings. This may be related to the quality of surgical safety checklists being performed in operating rooms. METHODS: In this explanatory, sequential, mixed-methods study, 2 trained observers used a standardized tool to record the compliance and quality of the surgical safety checklist completed during 51 surgeries performed at a pediatric academic hospital. We compared compliance with each phase of the surgical safety checklist, the number of checklist items completed, and professionals initiating the surgical safety checklist across surgical specialties and case urgency levels. Interviews with nurses, anesthesiologists, and surgeons (n = 18) were subsequently conducted to explore and contextualize the findings. RESULTS: Hospital-recorded surgical safety checklist compliance (94%, 100%, and 100% on briefing, time out, and debriefing) was higher than the proportion of checklist items completed in matched cases (26%, 59%, and 42%, respectively). Thematic analysis of the interview data suggests this may result from limited staff "buy in," arising from the "top-down" mandated nature of the surgical safety checklist, the perceived lack of benefit in surgical safety checklist completion, and redundancies with other operating room processes. This has led to the surgical safety checklist becoming "an exercise in box ticking" (ie, compliance is recorded without ensuring quality), thereby obfuscating potential safety benefits. CONCLUSION: These results highlight that compliance data are insufficient for monitoring surgical safety checklist quality. Our study suggests that surgical safety checklist quality may be enhanced through better calibration of the surgical safety checklist with existing procedures and staff expectations through a bottom-up implementation strategy.

Adverse events among children in Canadian hospitals: the Canadian Paediatric Adverse Events Study.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on adverse events among children admitted to hospital. The Canadian Paediatric Adverse Events Study was done to describe the epidemiology of adverse events among children in hospital in Canada. METHODS: We performed a 2-stage medical record review at 8 academic pediatric centres and 14 community hospitals in Canada. We reviewed charts from patients admitted from April 2008 through March 2009, evenly distributed across 4 age groups (0 to 28 d; 29 to 365 d; > 1 to 5 yr and > 5 to 18 yr). In stage 1, nurses and health records personnel who had received training in the use of the Canadian Paediatric Trigger Tool reviewed medical records to detect triggers for possible adverse events. In stage 2, physicians reviewed the charts identified as having triggers and described the adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 3669 children were admitted to hospital during the study period. The weighted rate of adverse events was 9.2%. Adverse events were more frequent in academic pediatric centres than in community hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.65-5.39). The incidence of preventable adverse events was not significantly different between types of hospital, but nonpreventable adverse events were more common in academic pediatric centres (adjusted OR 4.39, 95% CI 2.08-9.27). Surgical events predominated overall and occurred more frequently in academic pediatric centres than in community hospitals (37.2% v. 21.5%, relative risk [RR] 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-3.1), whereas events associated with diagnostic errors were significantly less frequent (11.1% v. 23.1%, RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). INTERPRETATION: More children have adverse events in academic pediatric centres than in community hospitals; however, adverse events in the former are less likely to be preventable. There are many opportunities to reduce harm affecting children in hospital in Canada, particularly related to surgery, intensive care and diagnostic error.

Building safer systems through critical occurrence reviews: nine years of learning.

At The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), the term critical occurrence was developed to describe any event that results in an actual or potential serious, undesirable and unexpected patient or staff outcome including death or major permanent loss of function, not related to the natural course of the patient's illness or underlying condition. It also includes a breach of legislation including the Personal Health Information Protection Act of Ontario. Although broader in its definition, the term aligns closely with critical incident as defined within the amendments to Regulation 965, under the Public Hospitals Act (Government of Ontario 1990). Critical occurrences may include (but are not limited to) potential or actual adverse outcomes (including death) associated with or resulting from medication errors; a wrong site, patient or procedure performed; contaminated drugs, devices or products; an equipment malfunction; an outbreak or unusual pattern/type of nosocomial infection; employee actual or potentially serious injuries.

Mutations in the known genes are not the major cause of MED; distinctive phenotypic entities among patients with no identified mutations.

Multiple epiphyseal dysplasia (MED) is a clinically and genetically heterogeneous chondrodysplasia. Mutations in six genes (COMP, COL9A1, COL9A2, COL9A3, MATN3 and DTDST) have been reported, but the genotype-phenotype correlations and the proportions of cases due to mutations in these genes are still not well characterized. We performed a clinical, radiological and molecular analysis of known MED genes on 29 consecutive MED patients. The mutation analysis resulted in identification of the DTDST mutation in four patients (14%), the COMP mutation in three (10%) and the MATN3 mutation in three (10%). Thus, a disease-causing mutation was identified in 10 patients altogether (34%). The phenotypic features observed in the patients with mutations were in accordance with previously described phenotypes, but two new distinct phenotypic entities were identified in patients in whom no mutation was found. One of them was characterized by severe, early-onset dysplasia of the proximal femurs with almost complete absence of the secondary ossification centres and abnormal development of the femoral necks. The other phenotype was characterized by 'mini-epiphyses', resulting in severe dysplasia of the proximal femoral heads. The findings suggest that mutations in the known genes are not the major cause of MED and are responsible for less than half of the cases. The existence of additional MED loci is supported by the exclusion of known loci by mutation analysis and finding of specific subgroups among these patients.

Impairment and activity limitation associated with epiphyseal dysplasia in children.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a profile of impairment and activity limitation among children with epiphyseal dysplasia (ED) and to identify the relationship between these 2 domains. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Acute, pediatric academic and health sciences center. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven subjects with multiple epiphyseal dysplasia (MED) and 17 subjects with spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia (SED), with a mean age of 12.9 years. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. Main outcome measures Anthropometric indexes of growth and nutrition, joint range of motion (ROM) and alignment, muscle strength, pain, and activity limitation. RESULTS: Subjects with SED had significantly shorter stature than the reference population (P<.01). Seventy-three percent of participants with MED and 77% of those with SED were above average or overweight for their height (P<.01). Both groups presented with moderate to severe joint ROM impairment, with greater lower-extremity involvement. Subjects with SED had worse outcomes with respect to overall ROM and alignment impairments (P<.01), particularly in their upper extremities (P<.01), than subjects with MED. Significant overall muscle weakness was noted in all subjects (z=-1.81; P<.01). Ninety-four percent of subjects with SED reported pain with activity, compared with 64% of those with MED (P=.04), although pain intensity did not differ between groups. Fifty percent of subjects had undergone orthopedic surgery. Mild activity limitation was reported by all subjects (mean score, 87.7+/-18.83). Significant correlations were identified between height for age and strength (r=.50) and pain and activity limitation (r=-.50). CONCLUSIONS: Despite moderate to severe impairments, all subjects reported surprisingly mild activity limitation. A positive correlation was identified between pain and activity limitation. This study also identified and described patterns of muscle weakness, pain, and nutritional concerns not previously reported in the ED literature.