Adapting the World Health Organization's Surgical Safety Checklist to High-Income Settings: A Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Trial Protocol.

Objectives: The proposed study aims to assess users' perceptions of a surgical safety checklist (SSC) reimplementation toolkit and its impact on SSC attitudes and operating room (OR) culture, meaningful checklist use, measures of surgical safety, and OR efficiency at 3 different hospital sites. Background: The High-Performance Checklist toolkit (toolkit) assists surgical teams in modifying and implementing or reimplementing the World Health Organization's SSC. Through the explore, prepare, implement, and sustain implementation framework, the toolkit provides a process and set of tools to facilitate surgical teams' modification, implementation, training on, and evaluation of the SSC. Methods: A pre-post intervention design will be used to assess the impact of the modified SSC on surgical processes, team culture, patient experience, and safety. This mixed-methods study includes quantitative and qualitative data derived from surveys, semi-structured interviews, patient focus groups, and SSC performance observations. Additionally, patient outcome and OR efficiency data will be collected from the study sites' health surveillance systems. Data analysis: Statistical data will be analyzed using Statistical Product and Service Solutions, while qualitative data will be analyzed thematically using NVivo. Furthermore, interview data will be analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance implementation frameworks. Setting: The toolkit will be introduced at 3 diverse surgical sites in Alberta, Canada: an urban hospital, university hospital, and small regional hospital. Anticipated impact: We anticipate the results of this study will optimize SSC usage at the participating surgical sites, help shape and refine the toolkit, and improve its usability and application at future sites.

The value of a spaceflight clinical decision support system for earth-independent medical operations.

As NASA prepares for crewed lunar missions over the next several years, plans are also underway to journey farther into deep space. Deep space exploration will require a paradigm shift in astronaut medical support toward progressively earth-independent medical operations (EIMO). The Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) is investigating the feasibility and value of advanced capabilities to promote and enhance EIMO. Currently, astronauts rely on real-time communication with ground-based medical providers. However, as the distance from Earth increases, so do communication delays and disruptions. Moreover, resupply and evacuation will become increasingly complex, if not impossible, on deep space missions. In contrast to today's missions in low earth orbit (LEO), where most medical expertise and decision-making are ground-based, an exploration crew will need to autonomously detect, diagnose, treat, and prevent medical events. Due to the sheer amount of pre-mission training required to execute a human spaceflight mission, there is often little time to devote exclusively to medical training. One potential solution is to augment the long duration exploration crew's knowledge, skills, and abilities with a clinical decision support system (CDSS). An analysis of preliminary data indicates the potential benefits of a CDSS to mission outcomes when augmenting cognitive and procedural performance of an autonomous crew performing medical operations, and we provide an illustrative scenario of how such a CDSS might function.

Anaesthesia clinicians' perception of safety, workload, anxiety, and stress in a remote hybrid suite compared with the operating room.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthesia care outside of the standard operating room (OR) can be challenging. This prospective matched case-pair study describes the difference in anaesthesia clinicians' perception of safety, workload, anxiety, and stress in two settings by comparing similar neurosurgical procedures performed in either the OR or a remote hybrid room with intraoperative MRI (MRI-OR). METHODS: A visual numeric scale for safety perception and validated instruments for workload, anxiety, and stress were administered to enrolled anaesthesia clinicians after induction of anaesthesia and at the end of eligible cases. The difference in outcomes reported by the same clinician for unique pairs of similar operations performed in both settings (OR vs MRI-OR) was compared using the Student t-test with the general bootstrap algorithm to address the presence of clusters. RESULTS: Over 15 months, 37 clinicians provided data for 53 case pairs. Working in the remote MRI-OR vs OR was associated with lower perceived safety (7.3 [2.0] vs 8.8 [0.9]; P<0.001), higher scores in the workload subdomains effort and frustration (41.6 [24.1] vs 31.3 [21.6]; P=0.006 and 32.4 [22.9] vs 20.7 [17.2]; P=0.002, respectively), and higher anxiety (33.6 [10.1] vs 28.4 [9.2]; P=0.003) at the end of the case. Stress was rated higher in the MRI-OR after induction of anaesthesia (26.5 [15.5] vs 20.9 [13.4]; P=0.006). Effect sizes (Cohen's D) were moderate to good. CONCLUSIONS: Anaesthesia clinicians reported lower perceived safety and higher workload, anxiety, and stress in a remote MRI-OR compared with a standard OR. Improving non-standard work settings should benefit clinician well-being and patient safety. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: .

Extended Reality Applications for Space Health.

INTRODUCTION: Spaceflight has detrimental effects on human health, imposing significant and unique risks to crewmembers due to physiological adaptations, exposure to physical and psychological stressors, and limited capabilities to provide medical care. Previous research has proposed and evaluated several strategies to support and mitigate the risks related to astronauts' health and medical exploration capabilities. Among these, extended reality (XR) technologies, including augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and mixed reality (MR) have increasingly been adopted for training, real-time clinical, and operational support in both terrestrial and aerospace settings, and only a few studies have reported research results on the applications of XR technologies for improving space health. This study aims to systematically review the scientific literature that has explored the application of XR technologies in the space health field. We also discuss the methodological and design characteristics of the existing studies in this realm, informing future research and development efforts on applying XR technologies to improve space health and enhance crew safety and performance.Ebnali M, Paladugu P, Miccile C, Park SH, Burian B, Yule S, Dias RD. Extended reality applications for space health. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2023; 94(3):122-130.

Impact of the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist Relative to Its Design and Intended Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify what parts of the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (WHO SSC) are working, what can be done to make it more effective, and to determine if it achieved its intended effect relative to its design and intended use. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis and meta-meta-analyses of findings in WHO SSC systematic reviews following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty systematic reviews were included for qualitative thematic analysis. Narrative information was coded in 4 primary areas with a focus on impact of the WHO SSC. Four themes-Clinical Outcomes, Process Measures, Team Dynamics and Communication, and Safety Culture-pertained directly to the aims or purposes behind the development of the SSC. The other 2 themes-Efficiency and Workload involved in using the checklist and Checklist Impact on Institutional Practices-are associated with SSC use, but were not focal areas considered during its development. Included in the 20 systematic reviews were 24 unique observational cohort studies that reported pre-post data on a total of 18 clinical outcomes. Mortality, morbidity, surgical site infection, pneumonia, unplanned return to the operating room, urinary tract infection, blood loss requiring transfusion, unplanned intubation, and sepsis favored the use of the WHO SSC. Deep vein thrombosis was the only postoperative outcome assessed that did not favor use of the WHO SSC. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO SSC positively impacts the things it was explicitly designed to address and does not positively impact things it was not explicitly designed for.

Hospitalist Perceptions of Barriers to Lung Ultrasound Adoption in Diverse Hospital Environments.

Despite the many advantages of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis and management of patients with dyspnea, its adoption among hospitalists has been slow. We performed semi-structured interviews of hospitals from four diverse health systems in the United States to understand determinants of adoption within a range of clinical settings. We used the diffusion of innovation theory to guide a framework analysis of the data. Of the 27 hospitalists invited, we performed 22 interviews from four hospitals of diverse types. Median years post-residency of interviewees was 10.5 [IQR:5-15]. Four main themes emerged: (1) There are important clinical advantages to LUS despite operator dependence, (2) LUS enhances patient and clinician experience, (3) Investment of clinician time to learn and perform LUS is a barrier to adoption but yields improved efficiency for the health system and (4) Mandated training and use may be necessary to achieve broad adoption as monetary incentives are less effective. Despite the perceived benefits of LUS for patients, clinicians and health systems, a significant barrier to broad LUS adoption is the experience of time scarcity by hospitalists. Future implementation strategies should focus on changes to the clinical environment that address clinician barriers to learning and adoption of new skills.

We Asked the Experts: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Recommendations for Content and Implementation Adaptations.

BACKGROUND: As surgical systems are forced to adapt and respond to new challenges, so should the patient safety tools within those systems. We sought to determine how the WHO SSC might best be adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: 18 Panelists from five continents and multiple clinical specialties participated in a three-round modified Delphi technique to identify potential recommendations, assess agreement with proposed recommendations and address items not meeting consensus. RESULTS: From an initial 29 recommendations identified in the first round, 12 were identified for inclusion in the second round. After discussion of recommendations without consensus for inclusion or exclusion, four additional recommendations were added for an eventual 16 recommendations. Nine of these recommendations were related to checklist content, while seven recommendations were related to implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This multinational panel has identified 16 recommendations for sites looking to use the surgical safety checklist during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations provide an example of how the SSC can adapt to meet urgent and emerging needs of surgical systems by targeting important processes and encouraging critical discussions.

Surgical Teams' Attitudes About Surgical Safety and the Surgical Safety Checklist at 10 Years: A Multinational Survey.

To assess health care professionals' attitudes on the Surgical Safety Checklist ("the Checklist") in resource-rich health systems and provide insights on strategies for optimizing Checklist use. Background: In use for over a decade, the Checklist is a safety instrument aimed at improving operating room communication, teamwork, and evidence-based safety practices. Methods: An online survey was sent to surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists in 5 high-income countries (Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand). Survey results were analyzed using SPSS. Results: A total of 2032 health care professionals completed the survey. Of these respondents, 47.6% were nurses, 70.5% were women, 65.1% were from the United States, and 50.0% had 20 years of experience or more in their role. Most respondents felt the Checklist positively impacted patient safety (70.9%), team communication (73.1%), and teamwork (58.9%). Only 50.3% of respondents were satisfied their team's use of the Checklist, and only 47.5% reported team members stopping to fully participate in the process. More nurses lacked confidence regarding their role in the Checklist process than surgeons and anesthesiologists combined (8.9% vs 4.3%). Fewer surgeons and anesthesiologists than nurses felt they received adequate training on the Checklist's use (57.8% vs 76.7%). Conclusions: While most respondents perceive the Checklist as enhancing patient safety, not all surgical team members are actively engaging with its use. To enhance buy-in and meaningful use of the Checklist, health systems should provide more training on the Checklist with respect to its purpose and strengthening teamwork.

Why We Fail to Rescue During Critical Events.

Many factors come together probabilistically to affect clinician response to critical events in the operating room; no 2 critical events are alike. These factors involve 4 primary domains: (1) the event itself, (2) the individual anesthetist(s), (3) the operating room team, and (4) the resources available and environments in which the event occurs. Appreciating these factors, anticipating how they create vulnerabilities for error and poor response, and actively addressing those vulnerabilities (before events occur as well as during) will help clinicians manage critical event response more effectively and avoid errors.

Cognitive Aids in Obstetric Units: Design, Implementation, and Use.

Obstetrics has unique considerations for high stakes and dynamic clinical care of ≥2 patients. Obstetric crisis situations require efficient and coordinated responses from the entire multidisciplinary team. Actions that teams perform, or omit, can strongly impact peripartum and perinatal outcomes. Cognitive aids are tools that aim to improve patient safety, efficiency in health care management, and patient outcomes. However, they are intended to be combined with clinician judgment and training, not as absolute or exhaustive standards of care for patient management. There is simulation-based evidence showing efficacy of cognitive aids for enhancing appropriate team management during crises, especially with a reader role, with growing literature supporting use in obstetric and nonobstetric clinical settings when combined with local customization and implementation efforts. The purpose of this article is to summarize current understanding and available resources for cognitive aid design, implementation, and use in obstetrics and to highlight existing gaps that can stimulate further enhancement in this field.

The effect of cognitive aid design on the perceived usability of critical event cognitive aids.

BACKGROUND: Critical events require that clinicians process information and make decisions quickly. To reduce mental workload during such events, cognitive aids have been developed. We have previously observed that designing such aids to facilitate discrete information transfer decreased time to information finding. However, whether clinicians perceive aids designed for discrete information transfer as more usable than step-by-step designs remains unclear. We hypothesized that experimental cognitive aids designed for discrete information transfer would be judged more usable than step-by-step Linear aids. METHODS: Volunteer clinicians were asked to use cognitive aids during low fidelity simulation scenarios. Experimental cognitive aids featuring color-coded, labeled, and consistently located content clusters were compared with aids formatted in a traditional step-by-step fashion. We then performed a quantitative assessment of perceived usability and conducted structured knowledge elicitation interviews. RESULTS: Clinicians rated the two experimental cognitive aids as more usable than the Linear aid. On a 0-100 scale the median (IQR) rating was 25(18,23) for the Linear aid and 89(80,95) and 81(65,90) for the two experimental designs, respectively, with a higher number indicating greater ease of use (P < .01 for each). Narrative responses suggested specific features that improved usability and a thematic analysis identified six major themes driving preference for cognitive aid use. CONCLUSION: During simulated critical events, cognitive aids designed for discrete information transfer were considered more usable than step by step Linear aids. Specific themes governing usability were identified during mixed methods analysis. Further work is needed to optimize cognitive aid use among anesthesia clinicians.

Development and Usability Testing of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia Pedi Crisis Mobile Application.

When life-threatening, critical events occur in the operating room, the fast-paced, high-distraction atmosphere often leaves little time to think or deliberate about management options. Success depends on applying a team approach to quickly implement well-rehearsed, systematic, evidence-based assessment and treatment protocols. Mobile devices offer resources for readily accessible, easily updatable information that can be invaluable during perioperative critical events. We developed a mobile device version of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia 26 Pediatric Crisis paper checklists-the Pedi Crisis 2.0 application-as a resource to support clinician responses to pediatric perioperative life-threatening critical events. Human factors expertise and principles were applied to maximize usability, such as by clustering information into themes that clinicians utilize when accessing cognitive aids during critical events. The electronic environment allowed us to feature optional diagnostic support, optimized navigation, weight-based dosing, critical institution-specific phone numbers pertinent to emergency response, and accessibility for those who want larger font sizes. The design and functionality of the application were optimized for clinician use in real time during actual critical events, and it can also be used for self-study or review. Beta usability testing of the application was conducted with a convenience sample of clinicians at 9 institutions in 2 countries and showed that participants were able to find information quickly and as expected. In addition, clinicians rated the application as slightly above "excellent" overall on an established measure, the Systems Usability Scale, which is a 10-item, widely used and validated Likert scale created to assess usability for a variety of situations. The application can be downloaded, at no cost, for iOS devices from the Apple App Store and for Android devices from the Google Play Store. The processes and principles used in its development are readily applicable to the development of future mobile and electronic applications for the field of anesthesiology.

Matching design to use: a task analysis comparison of three cognitive aid designs used during simulated crisis management.

PURPOSE: Intraoperative critical events typically include vital sign instability that requires a specific and time-sensitive response. Although cognitive aids can improve clinical performance during critical events, their design may not be optimized for real-world use. For example, during a critical event, health practitioners may be familiar with the treatment pathway and only require specific information from an aid-a behaviour described as "sampling". We hypothesized that use of cognitive aids designed to facilitate sampling behaviour would reduce the time required to extract information during simulated critical events. METHODS: We designed two experimental cognitive aids, based on cognitive science research on human performance, to facilitate sampling behaviour. Design principles included content clusters that were specifically located, colour-coded and labelled, the elimination of distractors such as numbering, and a key features summary. In a simulated low-fidelity study, we compared the time required for anesthesia care providers to identify and extract specific information from these two experimental cognitive aids and from a traditional step-by-step "linear/control" aid. An eye-tracking device was used to assess how information was accessed from the cognitive aids. RESULTS: When all response times were pooled, participants identified and extracted information more quickly using either experimental aid (median [interquartile range] 6.3 [4.0-9.7] sec, P = 0.006 and 4.7 [3.3-6.3] sec, P < 0.001) than the "linear/control" cognitive aid (12.7 [9.3-14.7] sec). Eye-tracking data revealed that participants spent more time looking at the "linear/control" design cognitive aid [mean (standard deviation) 10.9 (7.1) sec] than at either experimental cognitive aid [6.7 (4.6) and 3.8 (2.5) sec, P = 0.020, P < 0.001], respectively. CONCLUSION: Cognitive aids designed to enhance sampling behaviour may facilitate rapid retrieval of specific information during crisis management.

More Than a Tick Box: Medical Checklist Development, Design, and Use.

Despite improving patient safety in some perioperative settings, some checklists are not living up to their potential and complaints of "checklist fatigue" and outright rejection of checklists are growing. Problems reported often concern human factors: poor design, inadequate introduction and training, duplication with other safety checks, poor integration with existing workflow, and cultural barriers. Each medical setting-such as an operating room or a critical care unit-and different clinical needs-such as a shift handover or critical event response-require a different checklist design. One size will not fit all, and checklists must be built around the structure of medical teams and the flow of their work in those settings. Useful guidance can be found in the literature; however, to date, no integrated and comprehensive framework exists to guide development and design of checklists to be effective and harmonious with the flow of medical and perioperative tasks. We propose such a framework organized around the 5 stages of the checklist life cycle: (1) conception, (2) determination of content and design, (3) testing and validation, (4) induction, training, and implementation, and (5) ongoing evaluation, revision, and possible retirement. We also illustrate one way in which the design of checklists can better match user needs in specific perioperative settings (in this case, the operating room during critical events). Medical checklists will only live up to their potential to improve the quality of patient care if their development is improved and their designs are tailored to the specific needs of the users and the environments in which they are used.

The Development and Implementation of Cognitive Aids for Critical Events in Pediatric Anesthesia: The Society for Pediatric Anesthesia Critical Events Checklists.

Cognitive aids such as checklists are commonly used in modern operating rooms for routine processes, and the use of such aids may be even more important during critical events. The Quality and Safety Committee of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) has developed a set of critical-event checklists and cognitive aids designed for 3 purposes: (1) as a repository of the latest evidence-based and expert opinion-based information to guide response and management of critical events, (2) as a source of just-in-time information during critical events, and (3) as a method to facilitate a shared understanding of required actions among team members during a critical event. Committee members, who represented children's hospitals from across the nation, used the recent literature and established guidelines (where available) and incorporated the expertise of colleagues at their institutions to develop these checklists, which included relevant factors to consider and steps to take in response to critical events. Human factors principles were incorporated to enhance checklist usability, facilitate error-free accomplishment, and ensure a common approach to checklist layout, formatting, structure, and design.The checklists were made available in multiple formats: a PDF version for easy printing, a mobile application, and at some institutions, a Web-based application using the anesthesia information management system. After the checklists were created, training commenced, and plans for validation were begun. User training is essential for successful implementation and should ideally include explanation of the organization of the checklists; familiarization of users with the layout, structure, and formatting of the checklists; coaching in how to use the checklists in a team environment; reviewing of the items; and simulation of checklist use. Because of the rare and unpredictable nature of critical events, clinical trials that use crisis checklists are difficult to conduct; however, recent and future simulation studies with adult checklists provide a promising avenue for future validation of the SPA checklists. This article will review the developmental steps in producing the SPA crisis checklists, including creation of content, incorporation of human factors elements, and validation in simulation. Critical-events checklists have the potential to improve patient care during emergency events, and it is hoped that incorporating the elements presented in this article will aid in successful implementation of these essential cognitive aids.

A Time-Out Checklist for Pediatric Regional Anesthetics.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although pediatric regional anesthesia has a demonstrated record of safety, adverse events, especially those related to block performance issues, still may occur. To reduce the frequency of those events, we developed a Regional Anesthesia Time-Out Checklist using expert opinion and the Delphi method. METHODS: A content development and review was performed by the authors and the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia Quality and Safety Committee. The expert panel was composed of 12 pediatric anesthesiologists, who achieved consensus after 2 rounds of a modified Delphi method. Finally, an author who is an expert in checklist design (B.B.) provided guidance on the formatting and layout of the checklist items to ensure clarity and ease of use. The resulting checklist was trialed in a small pilot study to solicit feedback in a real-life setting. RESULTS: Sixteen items were included in the checklist sent to the expert panel for the first round of Delphi. Items that had an average rating of 3 or more, with fewer than 3 negative comments, were retained (n = 15). Feedback led to combining several items and dividing the checklist into 2 sections based on the following temporal implementation criteria: "preoperatively" or "immediately before procedure." All remaining 12 checklist items received a positive response from more than 50% of expert panel members and therefore were retained after the second and final round of Delphi. No significant alterations were suggested in the pilot trial. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi method and human factors principles enabled the creation of a Regional Anesthesia Time-Out Checklist based on published and experiential knowledge of adverse events. Usability of the checklist was supported through the results of a pilot study.