Dataset Information

The impact of Joint Commission International accreditation on time periods in the operating room: A retrospective observational study.

ABSTRACT: The Joint Commission International (JCI) is responsible for upholding standards in healthcare and organizations in compliance receive accreditation. JCI requires quality improvement on patient safety goals, but requirements may prolong the total procedure/surgery time and reduce efficiency. Here, we evaluate the impact of JCI requirements on time periods in the operating room. We included patients who received elective and emergency surgeries under general anesthesia at Juntendo University Hospital between December 2014 and June 2016. Patients were classified as before and after JCI accreditation on December 12, 2015. The primary outcome was total procedure/surgery time. Secondary outcomes include five time periods comprising the total procedure/surgery time: pre-anesthesia time, anesthesia induction time, procedure/surgery time, anesthesia awareness time and post-anesthesia time. We compared these time periods between patients before and after JCI accreditation and patients were matched for age, sex and the specific type of surgery. Although total procedure/surgery time did not change significantly, pre-anesthesia time significantly increased (8.2 ± 6.9 minutes vs. 8.5 ± 6.9 minutes, before vs. after JCI, respectively, p = 0.028) and anesthesia induction time significantly decreased (34.4 ± 16.1 minutes vs. 33.6 ± 15.4 minutes, before vs. after JCI, respectively, p = 0.037) after JCI accreditation. Other secondary study outcomes did not change significantly. Quality improvement initiatives associated with time periods in the operating room can be achieved without undermining efficiency.

SUBMITTER: Inomata T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6150533 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of Joint Commission International accreditation on time periods in the operating room: A retrospective observational study.

Inomata Takenori T Mizuno Ju J Iwagami Masao M Kawasaki Shiori S Shimada Akie A Inada Eiichi E Shiang Tina T Amano Atsushi A

PloS one 20180921 9

The Joint Commission International (JCI) is responsible for upholding standards in healthcare and organizations in compliance receive accreditation. JCI requires quality improvement on patient safety goals, but requirements may prolong the total procedure/surgery time and reduce efficiency. Here, we evaluate the impact of JCI requirements on time periods in the operating room. We included patients who received elective and emergency surgeries under general anesthesia at Juntendo University Hospi ...[more]

PMID: 30240416

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the evidence upon which standards for hospital accreditation by The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (the Joint Commission) are based.DesignCross sectional study.SettingUnited States.ParticipantsFour Joint Commission R3 (requirement, rationale, and reference) reports released by July 2018 and intended to become effective between 1 July 2018 and 1 July 2019.InterventionsFrom each R3 report the associated standard and its specific elements of performance (or actionable standards) were extracted. If an actionable standard enumerated multiple requirements, these were separated into distinct components. Two investigators reviewed full text references, and each actionable standard was classified as either completely supported, partly supported, or not supported; Oxford evidence quality ratings were assigned; and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the strength of recommendations.Main outcome measureStrengths of recommendation for actionable standards.Results20 actionable standards with 76 distinct components were accompanied by 48 references. Of the 20 actionable standards, six (30%) were completely supported by cited references, six were partly supported (30%), and eight (40%) were not supported. Of the six directly supported actionable standards, one (17%) cited at least one reference of level 1 or 2 evidence, none cited at least one reference of level 3 evidence, and five (83%) cited references of level 4 or 5 evidence. Of the completely supported actionable standards, strength of recommendation in five was deemed GRADE D and in one was GRADE B.ConclusionsIn general, recent actionable standards issued by The Joint Commission are seldom supported by high quality data referenced within the issuing documents. The Joint Commission might consider being more transparent about the quality of evidence and underlying rationale supporting each of its recommendations, including clarifying when and why in certain instances it determines that lower level evidence is sufficient.

Project description:BackgroundMaternal and child health are internationally considered to be among the best measures for assessing health-care quality. The study was carried out with the following aims: 1) to assess the quality of perinatal care (PC) by measuring the frequencies of the five PC indicators developed by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) and comparing results with international standards; 2) to examine whether maternal, pregnancy care and neonatal characteristics could be factors associated with the quality of perinatal care hospital performance, measured through these indicators.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed medical charts of women over the age of 18 who experienced delivery in Gynecology/obstetrics wards between January-December 2016, and those of their newborns hospitalized in the Neonatology or Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) of a public non-teaching hospital in Catanzaro (Italy). Indicators were calculated according to the methodology specified in the manual for JCAHO measures. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to test the independent association of maternal, pregnancy care and neonatal characteristics on the adherence to JCAHO PC indicators.ResultsThe records of 1943 women and 1974 newborns were identified and reviewed in order to be included in at least one of the PC indicators. Elective/early-term delivery, was performed in 27.6% of eligible women, far from the recommended goal (0%); cesarean section in nulliparous women with a term, singleton baby in a vertex position exceeded the suggested target of <?24% and the adherence to antenatal steroids administration was suboptimal (87%). Results of the exclusive breastfeeding indicator achieved a better performance (81%) and compliance with the PC-04 indicator was satisfactory with only 0.4% healthcare-associated bloodstream infection developed in eligible newborns.ConclusionsThis is the first study performed in Italy that has evaluated the quality of PC by using all the five JCAHO indicators. The application of this feasible set of indicators allowed us to measure several aspects of PC for which there is no standardized monitoring system in Italy. Our findings revealed significant deficiencies in the adherence to recommended processes of PC and suggest that there is still substantial work required to improve care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although the surgical pause or time-out is a required part of most hospitals' standard operating procedures, little is known about the quality of execution of the time-out in routine clinical practice. An interactive electronic time-out was implemented to increase surgical team compliance with the time-out procedure and to improve communication among team members in the operating room. We sought to identify nonroutine events that occur during the time-out procedure in the operating room, including distractions and interruptions, deviations from protocol, and the problem-solving strategies used by operating room team members to mitigate them. METHODS:Direct observations of surgical time-outs were performed on 166 nonemergent surgeries in 2016. For each time-out, the observers recorded compliance with each step, any nonroutine events that may have occurred, and whether any operating room team members were distracted. RESULTS:The time-out procedure was performed before the first incision in 100% of cases. An announcement was made to indicate the start of the time-out procedure in 163 of 166 observed surgeries. Most observed time-outs were completed in <1 minute. Most time-outs were completed without interruption (92.8%). The most common reason for an interruption was to verify patient information. Ten time-out procedures were stopped due to a safety concern. At least 1 member of the operating room team was actively distracted in 10.2% of the time-out procedures observed. CONCLUSIONS:Compliance with preincision time-outs is high at our institution, and nonroutine events are a rare occurrence. It is common for ?1 member of the operating room team to be actively distracted during time-out procedures, even though most time-outs are completed in under 1 minute. Despite distractions, there were no wrong-site or wrong-person surgeries reported at our hospital during the study period. We conclude that the simple act of performing a preprocedure checklist may be completed quickly, but that distractions are common.

Dataset Information

The impact of Joint Commission International accreditation on time periods in the operating room: A retrospective observational study.

Publications

The impact of Joint Commission International accreditation on time periods in the operating room: A retrospective observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets