Patient safety culture in the operating room: a cross-sectional study using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) Instrument.

BACKGROUND: Credible evidence has established a link between the level of patient safety culture in healthcare environments and patient outcomes. Patient safety culture in the operating room has received scant attention despite the burden of adverse events among surgical patients. We aimed to evaluate the safety culture in our operating rooms and compare with existing data from other operating room settings. METHODS: We investigated the patient safety culture in the operating rooms of our hospital as perceived by the surgeons, nurse anaesthetists and perioperative nurses using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) instrument. IBM Statistical Package for Social Science software, version 25, was used for data entry and analysis. Differences were considered significant when p < 0.05. RESULTS: Only 122 completed surveys were returned out of a survey population of 132 frontline staff, yielding a response rate of 92.4%. The overall average composite score was 47%. The average composite scores ranged from 17-79.6% across the 12 dimensions of the HSOPSC, with teamwork within units being the only dimension with demonstrable strength. Non-punitive response to error, communication openness, feedback and communication about error", frequency of events reported", handoffs and transition and staffing need improvement. The perceived safety culture varied according to work areas and professional roles with nurse anaesthetists having the highest perception and the surgeons the least. CONCLUSION: Patient safety culture in our operating rooms is adjudged to be weak, with only one of the twelve dimensions of HSOPSC demonstrating strength. This is notwithstanding its comparative strengths relative to other operating room settings.

Knowledge and practice of tracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring: a multicenter survey of anaesthesia and critical care providers in a developing country.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal tubes are routinely used during anaesthesia and in the intensive care unit. Subjective monitoring of cuff pressures have been reported to produce consistently inappropriate cuffs pressures, with attendant morbidity. But this practice of unsafe care remains widespread. With the proliferation of intensive care units in Nigeria and increasing access to surgery, morbidity relating to improper tracheal cuff pressure may assume a greater toll. We aimed to evaluate current knowledge and practice of tracheal cuff pressure monitoring among anaesthesia and critical care providers in Nigeria. METHODS: This was a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted from March 18 to April 30, 2021. The first part (A) was conducted at 4 tertiary referral hospitals in Nigeria by means of a self-administered questionnaire on the various cadre of anaesthesia and critical care providers. The second part (B) was a nation-wide telephone survey of anaesthesia faculty fellows affiliated to 13 tertiary hospitals in Nigeria, selected by stratified random sampling. RESULTS: Only 3.1% (6/196) of the care providers admitted having ever used a tracheal cuff manometer, while 31.1% knew the recommended tracheal cuff pressure. The nationwide telephone survey of anaesthesia faculty fellows revealed that tracheal cuff manometer is neither available, nor has it ever been used in any of the 13 tertiary hospitals surveyed. The 'Pilot balloon palpation method' and 'fixed volume of air from a syringe' were the most commonly utilized method of cuff pressure estimation by the care providers, at 64.3% and 28.1% respectively in part A survey (84.6% and 15.4% respectively, in the part B survey). CONCLUSION: The use of tracheal cuff manometer is very limited among the care providers surveyed in this study. Knowledge regarding tracheal cuff management among the providers is adjudged to be fair, despite the poor practice and unsafe care.

Nigerian surgical outcomes - Report of a 7-day prospective cohort study and external validation of the African surgical outcomes study surgical risk calculator.

BACKGROUND: Surgical outcomes study for individual nations remains important because of international differences in patterns of surgical disease. We aimed to contribute to data on post-operative complications, critical care admissions and mortality following elective surgery in Nigeria and also validate the African Surgical Outcomes Study (ASOS) surgical risk calculator in our adult patient cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 7-day, national prospective observational cohort study in consented consecutive patients undergoing elective surgery with a planned overnight hospital stay following elective surgery during a seven-day study period. The outcome measures were in-hospital postoperative complications, critical care admissions and in-hospital mortality censored at 30 days. Also, we identified variables which significantly contributed to higher ASOS surgical risk score. External validation was performed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) for discrimination assessment and Hosmer-Lemeshow test for calibration. RESULTS: A total of 1,425 patients from 79 hospitals participated in the study. Postoperative complications occurred in 264(18.5%, 95% CI 16.6-20.6), 20(7.6%) of whom were admitted into the ICU and 16(6.0%) did not survive. Total ICU admission was 57 (4%), with mortality rate of 23.5% following planned admission and overall in-hospital death was 22(1.5%, 95% CI 0.9-2.2). All prognostic factors in the ASOS risk calculator were significantly associated with higher ASOS score and the scoring system showed moderate discrimination (0⋅73, 95% CI 0.62-0.83). Hosmer-Lemeshow χ2 test revealed scale was well calibrated in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: NiSOS validates the findings of ASOS and the ability of the ASOS surgical risk calculator to predict risk of developing severe postoperative complications and mortality. We identified failure-to-rescue as a problem in Nigeria. Furthermore, this study has provided policy makers with benchmarks that can be used to monitor programmes aimed at reducing the morbidity and mortality after elective surgery. We recommend the adoption of the ASOS surgical risk calculator as a tool for risk stratification preoperatively for elective surgery.