The effects of surgical checklists on morbidity and mortality: a pre- and post-intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical checklists (SCs) have been developed to enhance teamwork and facilitate handovers, thereby improving the safety of surgical patients in health care organisations. The aim of this study was to determine whether the implementation of a 39-item SC reduced mortality and surgical adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing inpatient surgery. METHODS: A retrospective pre- and post-intervention study of two cohorts of surgical patients was conducted (n = 1602) in a tertiary teaching hospital. The patients' homogeneity was confirmed by studying 40 comorbidities, 13 analytical determinations and 14 patient- and intervention-related variables. A 39-item SC adapted from one by the World Health Organization was used. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of any AE, including death, within 30 days of the operation. Twenty-three types of AEs were analysed. RESULTS: Following implementation of the checklist, the rate of AEs per 100 patients decreased from 31.5% to 26.5% (P = 0.39), the rate of infectious AEs decreased from 13.9 to 9.6 (P = 0.037) and non-infectious AEs decreased from 17.5 to 16.8 (P = 0.82). For non-elective patients, total AEs decreased from 60.4 to 37.0 (P = 0.017). The proportion of patients with one or more AE decreased from 18.1% to 16.2% (P = 0.35), and the death rate at 30 days decreased from 1.5% to 0.9% (P = 0.35). CONCLUSION: The overall AE rate did not decrease significantly between the two periods. However, the rate of infectious AEs and overall AEs in patients with non-elective admissions had statistically significant reductions. Further research is needed to determine how and in which patients SC introduction can work successfully.

Percepción de los profesionales sobre la utilización y la utilidad del listado de verificación quirúrgica / The healthcare professional's perceptions on the implementation and usefulness of the surgical safety checklist

Objetivo. Conocer la percepción de los profesionales sobre el grado de utilización y la utilidad del listado de verificación quirúrgica (LVQ) tras su implantación en un hospital terciario. Material y métodos. Estudio descriptivo transversal. Cuestionario autocumplimentado con 5 preguntas sobre utilidad, 5 sobre utilización, 1 pregunta abierta y 4 preguntas de control. La población objetivo: cirujanos, anestesiólogos, enfermeras de planta y de quirófano del hospital. Resultados. La tasa de respuesta fue del 73% (entre el 51 y el 88%, según perfil profesional). El 95,7% de los profesionales manifestó utilizar siempre o casi siempre el LVQ cuando se interviene a un paciente quirúrgicamente. Los profesionales otorgaron al LVQ una utilidad media de 6,6 puntos (escala, 0-10), el 11,6% manifestó que gracias al LVQ se habían evitado errores, el 32,5% consideró que es una herramienta que mejora la comunicación entre los profesionales, y al 68% le gustaría que se cumplimentase el LVQ si ellos mismos fuesen a ser intervenidos. Los profesionales que contestaron que gracias al LVQ se consiguió evitar errores otorgaron valores de utilidad 1,4 puntos por encima de la media, en este mismo grupo, al 100% de los profesionales les gustaría que se utilizase el LVQ en ellos mismos y el 63,2% consideró que mejoraba la comunicación. No hubo diferencias en la utilidad en función de la experiencia profesional o el sexo. Conclusiones. Los profesionales utilizan casi siempre el LVQ y le otorgan una utilidad moderada. Los profesionales que experimentaron que gracias al LVQ se había conseguido evitar errores confirieron al LVQ una utilidad mayor que los que no lo experimentaron(AU)

Objective. To find out the perception of the health care professionals on the level of implementation and the usefulness of the surgical safety checklist (LVQ) after its introduction in a tertiary care hospital. Material and method. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a specially designed self-completion questionnaire. This consisted of 5 questions on the usefulness, 5 questions on the use of the LVQ, one open question and 4 control questions. The target population was hospital surgeons, anaesthetists, ward nurses, and surgical nurses. Results. The response rate was 73%, ranking from 51% to 88% depending on the respondent profile. Almost all (95.7%) of the respondents declared they always or almost always used the LVQ when performing a surgical operation. The health care professionals rated the usefulness of the LVQ with a mean of 6.6 (scale, 1-10); 11.6% mentioned that actual errors had been avoided through the use of the LVQ; 32.5% considered the LVQ as a tool that improves communication between professionals; and 68% of the respondents declared they would like the LVQ to be used if they were surgical patients. Those respondents who answered that the LVQ had prevented errors gave higher usefulness scores, 1.4 above the mean. In this same group, 100% of the respondents would like the LVQ to be used on themselves and 63.2% considered that communication had improved. There were no differences in usefulness scores as regards professional experience or gender. Conclusions. The health care professionals use the LVQ very frequently, and consider that it has a moderate usefulness. Those professionals with experience of the LVQ preventing errors considered it to be more useful than those who did not experience an error being prevented(AU)

[The healthcare professional's perceptions on the implementation and usefulness of the surgical safety checklist]. / Percepción de los profesionales sobre la utilización y la utilidad del listado de verificación quirúrgica.

OBJECTIVE: To find out the perception of the health care professionals on the level of implementation and the usefulness of the surgical safety checklist (LVQ) after its introduction in a tertiary care hospital. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a specially designed self-completion questionnaire. This consisted of 5 questions on the usefulness, 5 questions on the use of the LVQ, one open question and 4 control questions. The target population was hospital surgeons, anaesthetists, ward nurses, and surgical nurses. RESULTS: The response rate was 73%, ranking from 51% to 88% depending on the respondent profile. Almost all (95.7%) of the respondents declared they always or almost always used the LVQ when performing a surgical operation. The health care professionals rated the usefulness of the LVQ with a mean of 6.6 (scale, 1-10); 11.6% mentioned that actual errors had been avoided through the use of the LVQ; 32.5% considered the LVQ as a tool that improves communication between professionals; and 68% of the respondents declared they would like the LVQ to be used if they were surgical patients. Those respondents who answered that the LVQ had prevented errors gave higher usefulness scores, 1.4 above the mean. In this same group, 100% of the respondents would like the LVQ to be used on themselves and 63.2% considered that communication had improved. There were no differences in usefulness scores as regards professional experience or gender. CONCLUSIONS: The health care professionals use the LVQ very frequently, and consider that it has a moderate usefulness. Those professionals with experience of the LVQ preventing errors considered it to be more useful than those who did not experience an error being prevented.