Dataset Information

Effects of perioperative briefing and debriefing on patient safety: a prospective intervention study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:This study was carried out to improve patient safety in the operating theatre by the introduction of perioperative briefing and debriefing, which focused on an optimal collaboration between surgical team members. DESIGN:A prospective intervention study with one pretest and two post-test measurements: 1?month before and 4 months and 2.5 years after the implementation of perioperative briefing and debriefing, respectively. SETTING:Operating theatres of a tertiary care hospital with 875 beds in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS:All members of five surgical teams participated in the perioperative briefing and debriefing. INTERVENTION:The implementation of perioperative briefing and debriefing from July 2012 to January 2014. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES:The primary outcome was changes in the team climate, measured by the Team Climate Inventory. Secondary outcomes were the experiences of surgical teams with perioperative briefing and debriefing, measured with a structured questionnaire, and the duration of the briefings, measured by an independent observer. RESULTS:Two and a half years after the introduction of perioperative briefing and debriefing, the team climate increased statistically significant (p?0.05). Members of the five surgical teams strongly agreed with the positive influence of perioperative briefing and debriefing on clear agreements and reminding one another of the agreements of the day. They perceived a higher efficiency of the surgical programme with more operations starting on time and less unexpectedly long operation time. The perioperative briefing took less than 4?min to conduct. CONCLUSIONS:Perioperative briefing and debriefing improved the team climate of surgical teams and the efficiency of their work within the operating theatre with acceptable duration per briefing. Surgical teams with alternating team compositions have the most benefit of briefing and debriefing.

SUBMITTER: Leong KBMSL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5736045 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of perioperative briefing and debriefing on patient safety: a prospective intervention study.

Leong Katharina Brigitte Margarethe Siew Lan KBMSL Hanskamp-Sebregts Mirelle M van der Wal Raymond A RA Wolff Andre P AP

BMJ open 20171214 12

<h4>Objectives</h4>This study was carried out to improve patient safety in the operating theatre by the introduction of perioperative briefing and debriefing, which focused on an optimal collaboration between surgical team members.<h4>Design</h4>A prospective intervention study with one pretest and two post-test measurements: 1 month before and 4 months and 2.5 years after the implementation of perioperative briefing and debriefing, respectively.<h4>Setting</h4>Operating theatres of a tertiary c ...[more]

PMID: 29247103

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimTo review the literature on briefing and debriefing in neonatal resuscitation using International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) methodology to see if a formal systematic review is justified.MethodsThis scoping review was undertaken by an ILCOR Newborn Life Support scoping review team and guided by the ILCOR methodological framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were peer-reviewed, compared briefing/debriefing of healthcare professionals who had completed a neonatal resuscitation or simulated resuscitation and reported outcomes for infants, families or staff. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched.ResultsThis review included four studies that reported on three briefing/debriefing interventions: video debriefing, the use of checklists with a briefing/debriefing component and rapid cycle deliberate practice. Video debriefing was associated with improvements in the process of care and adherence to resuscitation guidelines. Use of checklists was associated with improvements in short term clinical outcomes and a reduction in communication problems. Rapid cycle deliberate practice may lead to short but not sustained improvements in algorithm compliance and timely completion of resuscitation steps.ConclusionThis scoping review did not identify sufficient new evidence to justify conducting new systematic reviews or review of current resuscitation guidelines. Improvements in the process of care, short term clinical outcomes and reduction in communication problems were associated with briefing/debriefing supported by video, checklists or rapid, cycle deliberate practice. It highlights knowledge gaps, including the need to consider briefing/debriefing separately from other interventions, the effect of briefing/debriefing on short- and long-term clinical outcomes and the effect of rapid cycle deliberate practice on resuscitation training.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Medical errors have an incidence of 9% and may lead to worse patient outcome. Teamwork training has the capacity to significantly reduce medical errors and therefore improve patient outcome. One common framework for teamwork training is crisis resource management, adapted from aviation and usually trained in simulation settings. Debriefing after simulation is thought to be crucial to learning teamwork-related concepts and behaviours but it remains unclear how best to debrief these aspects. Furthermore, teamwork-training sessions and studies examining education effects on undergraduates are rare. The study aims to evaluate the effects of two teamwork-focused debriefings on team performance after an extensive medical student teamwork training. METHODS AND ANALYSES:A prospective experimental study has been designed to compare a well-established three-phase debriefing method (gather-analyse-summarise; the GAS method) to a newly developed and more structured debriefing approach that extends the GAS method with TeamTAG (teamwork techniques analysis grid). TeamTAG is a cognitive aid listing preselected teamwork principles and descriptions of behavioural anchors that serve as observable patterns of teamwork and is supposed to help structure teamwork-focused debriefing. Both debriefing methods will be tested during an emergency room teamwork-training simulation comprising six emergency medicine cases faced by 35 final-year medical students in teams of five. Teams will be randomised into the two debriefing conditions. Team performance during simulation and the number of principles discussed during debriefing will be evaluated. Learning opportunities, helpfulness and feasibility will be rated by participants and instructors. Analyses will include descriptive, inferential and explorative statistics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study protocol was approved by the institutional office for data protection and the ethics committee of Charité Medical School Berlin and registered under EA2/172/16. All students will participate voluntarily and will sign an informed consent after receiving written and oral information about the study. Results will be published.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Physicians, particularly in hospitals, suffer from adverse working conditions. There is a close link between physicians' psychosocial work environment and the quality of the work they deliver. Our study aimed to explore whether a participatory work-design intervention involving hospital physicians is effective in improving working conditions and quality of patient care. METHODS: A prospective, controlled intervention study was conducted in two surgical and two internal departments. Participants were 57 hospital physicians and 1581 inpatients. The intervention was a structured, participatory intervention based on continuous group meetings. Physicians actively analyzed problematic working conditions, developed solutions, and initiated their implementation. Physicians' working conditions and patients' perceived quality of care were outcome criteria. These variables were assessed by standardized questionnaires. Additional data on implementation status were gathered through interviews. RESULTS: Over the course of ten months, several work-related problems were identified, categorized, and ten solutions were implemented. Post-intervention, physicians in the intervention departments reported substantially less conflicting demands and enhanced quality of cooperation with patients' relatives, compared to control group physicians. Moreover, positive changes in enhanced colleague support could be attributed to the intervention. Regarding patient reports of care quality of care, patient ratings of physicians organization of care improved for physicians in the intervention group. Five interviews with involved physicians confirm the plausibility of obtained results, provide information on implementation status and sustainability of the solutions, and highlight process-related factors for re-design interventions to improve hospital physicians work. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that participatory work design for hospital physicians is a promising intervention for improving working conditions and promoting patient quality of care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Serious preventable surgical events still occur despite considerable efforts to improve patient safety. In addition to learning from retrospective analyses, prospective risk-assessment methods may help to decrease preventable events further by targeting perioperative hazards. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the methods used to identify perioperative patient safety risks prospectively, and to describe the risk areas targeted, the quality characteristics and feasibility of methods. METHODS:MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. All studies describing the development and results of prospective methods to identify perioperative patient safety risks were included and assessed on methodological quality. Exclusion criteria were interventional studies, studies targeting one specific issue, studies reporting on structural factors relating to fundamental hospital items, and non-original or case studies. RESULTS:The electronic search resulted in 16?708 publications, but only 20 were included for final analysis, describing five prospective risk-assessment methods. Direct observation was used in most studies, often in combination. Direct (16 studies) and indirect (4 studies) observations identified (potential) adverse events (P)AEs, process flow disruptions, poor protocol compliance and poor practice performance. (Modified) Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA™) (5 studies) targeted potential process flow disruption failures, and direct (P)AE surveillance (3 studies) identified (P)AEs prospectively. Questionnaires (3 studies) identified poor protocol compliance, surgical flow disturbances and patients' willingness to ask questions about their care. Overall, quality characteristics and feasibility of the methods were poorly reported. CONCLUSION:The direct (in-person) observation appears to be the primary prospective risk-assessment method that currently may best help to target perioperative hazards. This is a reliable method and covers a broad spectrum of perioperative risk areas.

Project description:PurposeGiving birth is the most common reason for hospital admission, with Cesarean delivery being the most frequently performed inpatient surgery. Through a needs assessment and iterative design process involving patients and obstetric anesthesiologists, we previously developed a mobile application, C-Care, for patients undergoing Cesarean delivery. The focus of C-Care is perioperative education and self-monitoring of potential anesthetic complications. This study aimed to obtain feedback on patient engagement with C-Care.MethodWe conducted a prospective cohort study of patients ≥ 18 yr (n = 36) undergoing elective Cesarean delivery. Anonymous usage data were recorded for 30 days. On postoperative days 1-5, participants received daily self-monitoring questionnaires within C-Care. Fourteen days after surgery, participants received an online survey regarding satisfaction and use of C-Care.ResultsThirty-five out of 36 participants visited the application after orientation, with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of 32 [31-36] yr. Each participant visited the application a median of 15 [9-31] times over 30 days and completed a median of 3 [2-4] out of five self-monitoring questionnaires. Each participant viewed a median of 4 [2-7] out of eight education topics, with the most viewed patient education topics being "Controlling Pain" and "The First Few Days". Visits to the application were highest in the first week postpartum. Of the 18 respondents who completed the day 14 survey, 83% (n = 15) participants would recommend C-Care to other women, and the median participant satisfaction score was 7.5 out of 10 (range, 2-10).ConclusionMost participants used this mobile application for patient education and self-monitoring after elective Cesarean delivery. Insights into patient engagement with C-Care after Cesarean delivery could help design more effective perioperative mobile telehealth programs.Trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03746678); registered 5 November 2018.

Dataset Information

Effects of perioperative briefing and debriefing on patient safety: a prospective intervention study.

Publications

Effects of perioperative briefing and debriefing on patient safety: a prospective intervention study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets