Symptomatic presentation of cancer in primary care: a scoping review of patients' experiences and needs during the cancer diagnostic pathway.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to map the experiences and needs of patients presenting with symptoms of suspected cancer in the primary care interval (from when they first present to primary care to their first appointment or referral to a secondary or tertiary level healthcare facility). DESIGN: This was a scoping review. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies or reports written in English which included primary data on the primary care interval experiences and/or needs of adult patients presenting with new symptoms of suspected cancer were eligible. Studies which only included patients with secondary or recurring cancer, conference abstracts and reviews were excluded. No date limits were applied. METHODS: The Joanna Briggs Institute method for Scoping Reviews guided screening, report selection and data extraction. At least two independent reviewers contributed to each stage. Medline, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Embase and Web of Science were searched and several grey literature resources. Relevant quantitative findings were qualitised and integrated with qualitative findings. A thematic analysis was carried out. RESULTS: Of the 4855 records identified in the database search, 18 were included in the review, along with 13 identified from other sources. The 31 included studies were published between 2002 and 2023 and most (n=17) were conducted in the UK. Twenty subthemes across four themes (patient experience, interpersonal, healthcare professional (HCP) skills, organisational) were identified. No studies included patient-reported outcome measures. Patients wanted (1) to feel heard and understood by HCPs, (2) a plan to establish what was causing their symptoms, and (3) information about the next stages of the diagnostic process. CONCLUSIONS: Scoping review findings can contribute to service planning as the cancer diagnostic pathway for symptomatic presentation of cancer evolves. The effectiveness of this pathway should be evaluated not only in terms of clinical outcomes, but also patient-reported outcomes and experience, along with the perspectives of primary care HCPs.

Patient-completed safety checklists as an empowerment tool for patient involvement in patient safety: concepts, considerations and recommendations.

The application of safety checklists to healthcare settings to help systematise routines and improve communication between healthcare professionals has proven to be effective in reducing errors, complications, mortality and hospitalisation time. There is a new call to extend the checklist concept to develop safety checklists that can be used by patients to help empower their involvement in safety practices. Only a handful of studies around patient-completed checklists exist, but those that do indicate a positive impact on patient empowerment and involvement in safety-related behaviours. In this article, we present the concept of patient-completed checklists and provide a review of the existing evidence, highlighting important design and implementation considerations, and making recommendations for future research and development.

A Smartphone App Designed to Empower Patients to Contribute Toward Safer Surgical Care: Qualitative Evaluation of Diverse Public and Patient Perceptions Using Focus Groups.

BACKGROUND: MySurgery is a smartphone app designed to empower patients and their caregivers to contribute toward safer surgical care by following practical advice to help reduce susceptibility to errors and complications. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate service users' perceptions of MySurgery, including its perceived acceptability, the potential barriers and facilitators to accessing and using its content, and ideas about how to facilitate its effective implementation. The secondary aim is to analyze how the intended use of the app might differ for diverse patients, including seldom-heard groups. METHODS: We implemented a diversity approach to recruit participants from a range of backgrounds with previous experience of surgery. We aimed to achieve representation from seldom-heard groups, including those from a Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) background; those with a disability; and those from the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBT+) community. A total of 3 focus groups were conducted across a 2-month period, during which a semistructured protocol was followed to elicit a rich discussion around the app. The focus groups were audio recorded, and thematic analysis was carried out. RESULTS: In total, 22 individuals participated in the focus groups. A total of 50% (n=11) of the participants were from a BAME background, 59% (n=13) had a disability, and 36% (n=8) were from the LGBT+ community. There was a strong degree of support for the MySurgery app. The majority of participants agreed that it was acceptable and appropriate in terms of content and usability, and that it would help to educate patients about how to become involved in improving safety. The checklist-like format was popular. There was rich discussion around the accessibility and inclusivity of MySurgery. Specific user groups were identified who might face barriers in accessing the app or acting on its advice, such as those with visual impairments or learning difficulties and those who preferred to take a more passive role (eg, some individuals because of their cultural background or personality type). The app could be improved by signposting further specialty-specific information and incorporating a calendar and notes section. With regard to implementation, it was agreed that use of the app should be signposted before the preoperative appointment and that training and education should be provided for clinicians to increase awareness and buy-in. Communication about the app should clarify its scientific basis in plain English and should stress that its use is optional. CONCLUSIONS: MySurgery was endorsed as a powerful tool for enhancing patient empowerment and facilitating the direct involvement of patients and their caregivers in maintaining patient safety. The diversity approach allowed for a better understanding of the needs of different population groups and highlighted opportunities for increasing accessibility and involvement in the app.

Implementation Strategies and the Uptake of the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the implementation strategies used in World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) uptake in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); examine any association of implementation strategies with implementation effectiveness; and to assess the clinical impact. BACKGROUND: The SSC is associated with improved surgical outcomes but effective implementation strategies are poorly understood. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from June 2008 to February 2019 and included primary studies on SSC use in LMICs. Coprimary objectives were identification of implementation strategies used and evaluation of associations between strategies and implementation effectiveness. To assess the clinical impact of the SSC, we estimated overall pooled relative risks for mortality and morbidity. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018100034). RESULTS: We screened 1562 citations and included 47 papers. Median number of discrete implementation strategies used per study was 4 (IQR: 1-14, range 0-28). No strategies were identified in 12 studies. SSC implementation occurred with high penetration (81%, SD 20%) and fidelity (85%, SD 13%), but we did not detect an association between implementation strategies and implementation outcomes. SSC use was associated with a reduction in mortality (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.67-0.89), all complications (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.45-0.71) and infectious complications (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.37-0.52). CONCLUSIONS: The SSC is used with high fidelity and penetration is associated with improved clinical outcomes in LMICs. Implementation appears well supported by a small number of tailored strategies. Further application of implementation science methodology is required among the global surgical community.

A Smartphone App Designed to Empower Patients to Contribute Toward Safer Surgical Care: Community-Based Evaluation Using a Participatory Approach.

BACKGROUND: MySurgery is a smartphone app designed to increase patient and carer involvement in behaviors that contribute toward safety in surgical care. OBJECTIVE: This study presents a pilot evaluation of MySurgery in which we evaluated surgical patients' perceptions of the app in terms of its content, usability, and potential impacts on communication and safety. METHODS: A participatory action research (PAR) approach was used to formulate a research steering group consisting of 5 public representatives and 4 researchers with equal decision-making input. Surgical patients were recruited from the community using multiple approaches, including Web based (eg, social media, recruitment websites, and charitable or voluntary organizations) and face to face (via community centers). Participants referred to MySurgery before, during, and after their surgery and provided feedback via an embedded questionnaire and using reflective notes. RESULTS: A diverse mix of 42 patients took part with good representation from 2 "seldom heard" groups: those with a disability and those from a black, Asian, or minority ethnic group. Most were very supportive of MySurgery, particularly those with previous experience of surgery and those who felt comfortable to be involved in conversations and decisions around their care. The app showed particular potential to empower patients to become involved in their care conversations and safety-related behaviors. Perceptions did not differ according to age, ethnicity, or length of hospital stay. Suggestions for improving the app included how to make it more accessible to certain groups, for example, those with a disability. CONCLUSIONS: MySurgery is a novel technology-driven approach for empowering patients to play a role in improving surgical safety that seems feasible for use within the United Kingdom's National Health Service. Adopting a PAR approach and the use of a diversity strategy considerably enhanced the research process in terms of gaining diverse participant recruitment and patient and public involvement. Further testing with stakeholder groups will follow.

Sustainability of using the WHO surgical safety checklist: a mixed-methods longitudinal evaluation following a nationwide blended educational implementation strategy in Madagascar.

BACKGROUND: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist reduces postoperative complications by up to 50% with the biggest gains in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). However in LMICs, checklist use is sporadic and widespread implementation has hitherto been unsuccessful. In 2015/2016, we partnered with the Madagascar Ministry of Health to undertake nationwide implementation of the checklist. We report a longitudinal evaluation of checklist use at 12-18 months postimplementation. METHODS: Hospitals were identified from the original cohort using purposive sampling. Using a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design, the primary outcome was self-reported checklist use. Secondary outcomes included use of basic safety processes, assessment of team behaviour, predictors of checklist use, impact on individuals and organisational culture and identification of barriers. Data were collected during 1-day hospital visits using validated questionnaires, WHO Behaviourally Adjusted Rating Scale (WHOBARS) assessment tool and focus groups and analysed using descriptive statistics, multivariate linear regression and thematic analysis. RESULTS: 175 individuals from 14 hospitals participated. 74% reported sustained checklist use after 15 months. Mean WHOBARS scores were high, indicating good team engagement. Sustained checklist use was associated with an improved overall understanding of patient safety but not with WHOBARS, hospital size or surgical volume. 87% reported improved understanding of patient safety and 83% increased job satisfaction. Thematic analysis identified improvements in hospital culture (teamwork and communication, preparation and organisation, trust and confidence) and hospital practice (pulse oximetry, timing of antibiotic prophylaxis, introduction of a surgical count). Lack of time in an emergency and obstructive leadership were the greatest implementation barriers. CONCLUSION: 74% of participants reported sustained checklist use 12-18 months following nationwide implementation in Madagascar, with associated improvements in job satisfaction, culture and compliance with safety procedures. Further work is required to examine this implementation model in other countries.

Relationship between acute stress and clinical performance in medical students: a pilot simulation study.

Background: Acute stress has been linked to impaired clinical performance in healthcare settings. However, few studies have measured experienced stress and performance simultaneously using robust measures in controlled experimental conditions, which limits the strength of their findings. Aim: In the current study we examined the relationship between acute stress and clinical performance in second-year medical students undertaking a simulated ECG scenario. To explore this relationship in greater depth we manipulated two variables (clinical urgency and cognitive load), and also examined the impact of trait anxiety and task self-efficacy. Methods: Second-year medical students were asked to conduct a 12-lead ECG on a simulated patient. Students were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions according to clinical urgency (high/low) and cognitive load (high/low), which were manipulated during a handover prior to the ECG. As part of the scenario they were asked to describe the ECG trace to a senior doctor over the phone and to conduct a drug calculation. They then received a performance debrief. Psychological stress and physiological stress were captured (via self-report and heart rate, respectively) and various aspects of performance were observed, including technical competence, quality of communication, work rate and compliance with patient safety checks. Trait anxiety and task self-efficacy were also captured via self-report. Results: Fifty students participated. While there was little impact of experimental condition on stress or performance, there was a significant relationship between stress and performance for the group as a whole. Technical competence was poorer for those reporting higher levels of psychological stress prior to and following the procedure. Neither trait anxiety nor task self-efficacy mediated this relationship. Conclusions: This study has provided evidence for a link between acute stress and impaired technical performance in medical students completing a simulated clinical scenario using real-time measures. The implications for patient safety and medical education are discussed.

Quality of interdisciplinary postsimulation debriefing: 360° evaluation.

Introduction: Debriefing is widely perceived to be the most important component of simulation-based training. This study aimed to explore the value of 360° evaluation of debriefing by examining expert debriefing evaluators, debriefers and learners' perceptions of the quality of interdisciplinary debriefings. Method: This was a cross-sectional observational study. 41 teams, consisting of 278 learners, underwent simulation-based team training. Immediately following the postsimulation debriefing session, debriefers and learners rated the quality of debriefing using the validated Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD) framework. All debriefing sessions were video-recorded and subsequently rated by evaluators trained to proficiency in assessing debriefing quality. Results: Expert debriefing evaluators and debriefers' perceptions of debriefing quality differed significantly; debriefers perceived the quality of debriefing they provided more favourably than expert debriefing evaluators (40.98% of OSAD ratings provided by debriefers were ≥+1 point greater than expert debriefing evaluators' ratings). Further, learner perceptions of the quality of debriefing differed from both expert evaluators and debriefers' perceptions: weak agreement between learner and expert evaluators' perceptions was found on 2 of 8 OSAD elements (learner engagement and reflection); similarly weak agreement between learner and debriefer perceptions was found on just 1 OSAD element (application). Conclusions: Debriefers and learners' perceptions of debriefing quality differ significantly. Both groups tend to perceive the quality of debriefing far more favourably than external evaluators. An overconfident debriefer may fail to identify elements of debriefing that require improvement. Feedback provided by learners to debriefers may be of limited value in facilitating improvements. We recommend periodic external evaluation of debriefing quality.

Implementation Science: A Neglected Opportunity to Accelerate Improvements in the Safety and Quality of Surgical Care.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to emphasize the importance of implementation science in understanding why efforts to integrate evidence-based interventions into surgical practice frequently fail to replicate the improvements reported in early research studies. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Over the past 2 decades, numerous patient safety initiatives have been developed to improve the quality and safety of surgical care. The surgical community is now faced with translating "promising" initiatives from the research environment into clinical practice-the World Health Organization (WHO) has described this task as one of the greatest challenges facing the global health community and has identified the importance of implementation science in scaling up evidence-based interventions. METHODS: Using the WHO surgical safety checklist, a prominent example of a rapidly and widely implemented surgical safety intervention of the past decade, a review of literature, spanning surgery, and implementation science, was conducted to identify and describe a broad range of factors affecting implementation success, including contextual factors, implementation strategies, and implementation outcomes. RESULTS: Our current approach to conceptualizing and measuring the "effectiveness" of interventions has resulted in factors critical to implementing surgical safety interventions successfully being neglected. CONCLUSION: Improvements in the safety and quality of surgical care can be accelerated by drawing more heavily upon implementation science and that until this rapidly evolving field becomes more firmly embedded into surgical research and implementation efforts, our understanding of why interventions such as the checklist "work" in some settings and appear "not to work" in other settings will be limited.

Surgical Checklist Implementation Project: The Impact of Variable WHO Checklist Compliance on Risk-adjusted Clinical Outcomes After National Implementation: A Longitudinal Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate impact of WHO checklist compliance on risk-adjusted clinical outcomes, including the influence of checklist components (Sign-in, Time-out, Sign-out) on outcomes. BACKGROUND: There remain unanswered questions surrounding surgical checklists as a quality and safety tool, such as the impact in cases of differing complexity and the extent of checklist implementation. METHODS: Data were collected from surgical admissions (6714 patients) from March 2010 to June 2011 at 5 academic and community hospitals. The primary endpoint was any complication, including mortality, occurring before hospital discharge. Checklist usage was recorded as checklist completed in full/partly. Multilevel modeling was performed to investigate the association between complications/mortality and checklist completion. RESULTS: Significant variability in checklist usage was found: although at least 1 of the 3 components was completed in 96.7% of cases, the entire checklist was only completed in 62.1% of cases. Checklist completion did not affect mortality reduction, but significantly lowered risk of postoperative complication (16.9% vs. 11.2%), and was largely noticed when all 3 components of the checklist had been completed (odds ratio = 0.57, 95% confidence interval: 0.37-0.87, P < 0.01). Calculated population-attributable fractions showed that 14% (95% confidence interval: 7%-21%) of the complications could be prevented if full completion of the checklist was implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Checklist implementation was associated with reduced case-mix-adjusted complications after surgery and was most significant when all 3 components of the checklist were completed. Full, as opposed to partial, checklist completion provides a health policy opportunity to improve checklist impact on surgical safety and quality of care.

Supporting transitions in medical career pathways: the role of simulation-based education.

Transitions, or periods of change, in medical career pathways can be challenging episodes, requiring the transitioning clinician to take on new roles and responsibilities, adapt to new cultural dynamics, change behaviour patterns, and successfully manage uncertainty. These intensive learning periods present risks to patient safety. Simulation-based education (SBE) is a pedagogic approach that allows clinicians to practise their technical and non-technical skills in a safe environment to increase preparedness for practice. In this commentary, we present the potential uses, strengths, and limitations of SBE for supporting transitions across medical career pathways, discussing educational utility, outcome and process evaluation, and cost and value, and introduce a new perspective on considering the gains from SBE. We provide case-study examples of the application of SBE to illustrate these points and stimulate discussion.

A qualitative evaluation of the barriers and facilitators toward implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist across hospitals in England: lessons from the "Surgical Checklist Implementation Project".

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how the World Health Organization (WHO) surgical safety checklist was implemented across hospitals in England; to identify barriers and facilitators toward implementation; and to draw out lessons for implementing improvement initiatives in surgery/health care more generally. BACKGROUND: The WHO checklist has been linked to improved surgical outcomes and teamwork, yet we know little about the factors affecting its successful uptake. METHODS: A longitudinal interview study with operating room personnel was conducted across a representative sample of 10 hospitals in England between March 2010 and March 2011. Interviews were audio recorded over the phone. Interviewees were asked about their experience of how the checklist was introduced and the factors that hindered or aided this process. Transcripts were submitted to thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 119 interviews were completed. Checklist implementation varied greatly between and within hospitals, ranging from preplanned/phased approaches to the checklist simply "appearing" in operating rooms, or staff feeling it had been imposed. Most barriers to implementation were specific to the checklist itself (eg, perceived design issues) but also included problematic integration into preexisting processes. The most common barrier was resistance from senior clinicians. The facilitators revealed some positive steps that can been taken to prevent/address these barriers, for example, modifying the checklist, providing education/training, feeding-back local data, fostering strong leadership (particularly at attending level), and instilling accountability. CONCLUSIONS: We identified common themes that have aided or hindered the introduction of the WHO checklist in England and have translated these into recommendations to guide the implementation of improvement initiatives in surgery and wider health care systems.

Measuring variation in use of the WHO surgical safety checklist in the operating room: a multicenter prospective cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Full implementation of safety checklists in surgery has been linked to improved outcomes and team effectiveness; however, reliable and standardized tools for assessing the quality of their use, which is likely to moderate their impact, are required. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter prospective study. A standardized observational instrument, the "Checklist Usability Tool" (CUT), was developed to record precise characteristics relating to the use of the WHO's surgical safety checklist (SSC) at "time-out" and "sign-out" in a representative sample of 5 English hospitals. The CUT was used in real-time by trained assessors across general surgery, urology, and orthopaedic cases, including elective and emergency procedures. RESULTS: We conducted 565 and 309 observations of the time-out and sign-out, respectively. On average, two-thirds of the items were checked, team members were absent in more than 40% of cases, and they failed to pause or focus on the checks in more than 70% of cases. Information sharing could be improved across the entire operating room (OR) team. Sign-out was not completed in 39% of cases, largely due to uncertainty about when to conduct it. Large variation in checklist use existed between hospitals, but not between surgical specialties or between elective and emergency procedures. Surgical safety checklist performance was better when surgeons led and when all team members were present and paused. CONCLUSIONS: We found large variation in WHO checklist use in a representative sample of English ORs. Measures sensitive to checklist practice quality, like CUT, will help identify areas for improvement in implementation and enable provision of comprehensive feedback to OR teams.

The WHO surgical safety checklist: survey of patients' views.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that full implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist across NHS operating theatres is still proving a challenge for many surgical teams. The aim of the current study was to assess patients' views of the checklist, which have yet to be considered and could inform its appropriate use, and influence clinical buy-in. METHOD: Postoperative patients were sampled from surgical wards at two large London teaching hospitals. Patients were shown two professionally produced videos, one demonstrating use of the WHO surgical safety checklist, and one demonstrating the equivalent periods of their operation before its introduction. Patients' views of the checklist, its use in practice, and their involvement in safety improvement more generally were captured using a bespoke 19-item questionnaire. RESULTS: 141 patients participated. Patients were positive towards the checklist, strongly agreeing that it would impact positively on their safety and on surgical team performance. Those worried about coming to harm in hospital were particularly supportive. Views were divided regarding hearing discussions around blood loss/airway before their procedure, supporting appropriate modifications to the tool. Patients did not feel they had a strong role to play in safety improvement more broadly. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible and instructive to capture patients' views of the delivery of safety improvements like the checklist. We have demonstrated strong support for the checklist in a sample of surgical patients, presenting a challenge to those resistant to its use.

Re-validating the Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery tool (OTAS-D): cultural adaptation, refinement, and psychometric evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The nontechnical and team skills of surgical teams are critical for safety and efficiency in the operating room. Assessment of nontechnical and team skills can facilitate improvement by encouraging both self-reflection and team reflection, identifying training needs, and informing operating room (OR) team training approaches. The observational teamwork assessment for surgery (OTAS) tool is a well-validated and robust tool for capturing teamwork in the operating room. The aims of the present study were to systematically adapt and refine the OTAS for German-speaking OR staff and to test the adapted assessment tool (OTAS-D) for psychometric properties and metric equivalence. METHODS: The study was carried out in three stages: at stage 1, OTAS was translated into German. At stage 2, experienced German OR experts (surgeons, OR nurses, anesthetists) were interviewed. At stage 3, two blinded assessors observed 11 general surgical operations (general surgical and vascular procedures) and interrater reliability was tested for refined OTAS-D behavioral exemplars and scorings. RESULTS: The German OR experts confirmed the applicability and content validity of the vast majority of translated behavioral exemplars. After their evaluation, 32 items were changed slightly, six were changed substantially, and one item was added. During observations, perfect and substantial interobserver agreement was found for 77 behavioral exemplars (67.1 % of the items, kappa coefficient >0.60). Rating at all OTAS behaviors showed acceptable levels of reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.72). CONCLUSIONS: The OTAS-D is a tool for valid and reliable assessment of nontechnical skills that contribute to safe and effective surgical performance in ORs staffed by German-speaking professionals. Furthermore, our study serves as an example for systematically adapting and customizing well-established observational tools across different healthcare environments.

Do safety checklists improve teamwork and communication in the operating room? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the impact of surgical safety checklists on the quality of teamwork and communication in the operating room (OR). BACKGROUND: Safety checklists have been shown to impact positively on patient morbidity and mortality following surgery, but it is unclear whether this clinical improvement is related to an improvement in OR teamwork and communication. METHODS: A systematic search strategy of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews was undertaken to obtain relevant articles. After de-duplication and the addition of limits, 315 articles were screened for inclusion by 2 researchers and all articles meeting a set of prespecified inclusion criteria were retained. Information regarding the type of checklist, study design, assessment tools used, outcomes, and study limitations was extracted. RESULTS: Twenty articles formed the basis of this systematic review. All articles described an empirical study relating to a case-specific safety checklist for surgery as the primary intervention, with some measure of change/improvement in teamwork and/or communication relating to its use. The methods for assessing teamwork and communication varied greatly, including surveys, observations, interviews, and 360° assessments. The evidence suggests that safety checklists improve the perceived quality of OR teamwork and communication and reduce observable errors relating to poor team skills. This is likely to function through establishing an open platform for communication at the start of a procedure: encouraging the sharing of critical case-related information, promoting team coordination and decision making, flagging knowledge gaps, and enhancing team cohesion. However, the evidence would also suggest that when used suboptimally or when individuals have not bought in to the process, checklists may conversely have a negative impact on the function of the team. CONCLUSIONS: Safety checklists are beneficial for OR teamwork and communication and this may be one mechanism through which patient outcomes are improved. Future research should aim to further elucidate the relationship between how safety checklists are used and team skills in the OR using more consistent methodological approaches and utilizing validated measures of teamwork such that best practice guidelines can be established.

How in situ simulation affects paediatric nurses' clinical confidence.

Considering the emphasis on safety in health care, new methods for training qualified nurses are being considered. The use of simulation technologies to provide regular and repeated training for qualified nurses in the management of paediatric emergencies has yet to be investigated. This paper presents the results of a study designed to determine if and how a period of regular simulation training in the management of paediatric emergencies improves qualified nurses' clinical confidence. A mixed methods design was employed using a group of qualified paediatric nurses (n=20) who were matched into two groups. The intervention group (n=10) received three simulation-based training sessions and the control group (n=10) had no training. Each nurse completed a pre- and post-clinical confidence questionnaire and were interviewed. Results demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in confidence following simulation training, which was explained by the provision of insight and preparation for real life. Further research should aim to replicate these findings using larger sample sizes and direct assessments of nurses' clinical performance.

Operation debrief: a SHARP improvement in performance feedback in the operating room.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the current status of performance feedback (debriefing) in the operating room and to develop and evaluate an evidence-based, user-informed intervention termed "SHARP" to improve debriefing in surgery. BACKGROUND: Effective debriefing is a key educational technique for optimizing learning in surgical settings. However, there is a lack of a debriefing culture within surgery. Few studies have prospectively evaluated educational interventions to improve the quality and quantity of performance feedback in surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective pre- and post-study of 100 cases involving 22 trainers (attendings) and 30 surgical residents (postgraduate years 3-8). A trained researcher assessed the quality of debriefings provided to the trainee using the validated Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD) tool alongside ethnographic observation. Following the first 50 cases, an educational intervention termed "SHARP" was introduced and measures repeated for a further 50 cases. User satisfaction with SHARP was assessed via questionnaire. Twenty percent of the cases were observed independently by a second researcher to test interrater reliability. RESULTS: Interrater reliability for OSAD was excellent (ICC = 0.994). Objective scores of debriefing (OSAD) improved significantly after the SHARP intervention: median pre = 19 (range, 8-31); median post = 33 (range, 26-40), P < 0.001. Strong correlations between observer (OSAD) and trainee rating of debriefing were obtained (median ρ = 0.566, P < 0.01). Ethnographic observations also supported a significant improvement in both quality and style of debriefings. Users reported high levels of satisfaction in terms of usefulness, feasibility, and comprehensiveness of the SHARP tool. CONCLUSIONS: SHARP is an effective and efficient means of improving performance feedback in the operating room. Its routine use should be promoted to optimize workplace-based learning and foster a positive culture of debriefing and performance improvement within surgery.