Dataset Information

Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy.

Methods

In two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those having elective gastrointestinal surgery. Relationships between reported checklist use and mortality were determined using multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapped simulation.

Results

Of 12 296 patients included from 76 countries, 4843 underwent emergency laparotomy. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, checklist use before emergency laparotomy was more common in countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) (2455 of 2741, 89·6 per cent) compared with that in countries with a middle (753 of 1242, 60·6 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0·17, 95 per cent c.i. 0·14 to 0·21, P < 0·001) or low (363 of 860, 42·2 per cent; OR 0·08, 0·07 to 0·10, P < 0·001) HDI. Checklist use was less common in elective surgery than for emergency laparotomy in high-HDI countries (risk difference -9·4 (95 per cent c.i. -11·9 to -6·9) per cent; P < 0·001), but the relationship was reversed in low-HDI countries (+12·1 (+7·0 to +17·3) per cent; P < 0·001). In multivariable models, checklist use was associated with a lower 30-day perioperative mortality (OR 0·60, 0·50 to 0·73; P < 0·001). The greatest absolute benefit was seen for emergency surgery in low- and middle-HDI countries.

Conclusion

Checklist use in emergency laparotomy was associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Checklist use in low-HDI countries was half that in high-HDI countries.

SUBMITTER: GlobalSurg Collaborative

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6492154 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy.

The British journal of surgery 20190101 2

<h4>Background</h4>The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy.<h4>Methods</h4>In two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those hav ...[more]

PMID: 30620059

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEmergency laparotomy (EL) is a central, high-risk procedure in emergency surgery. Patients in need of an EL present an acute pathology in the abdomen that must be operated on in order to save their lives. Usually, the underlying condition produces an affected physiology. The perioperative management of this critically ill patient group in need of high-risk surgery and anaesthesia is challenging and related to high mortality worldwide. However, outcomes in Sweden have yet to be studied. This retrospective cohort study explores the perioperative management and outcome after 710 ELs by investigating mortality, overall length of stay (LOS) in hospital, need for care at the intensive care unit (ICU), surgical complications and a general review of perioperative management.MethodsMedical records after laparotomy was retrospectively analysed for a period of 38 months (2014-2017), the emergency cases were included. Children (< 18 years), aortic surgery, second look and other expected reoperations were excluded. Demographic, management and outcome data were collected after an extensive analysis of the cohort.ResultsA total of 710 consecutive operations, representing 663 patients, were included in the cohort (mean age 65.6 years). Mortality (30 days/1 year) after all operations was 14.2% and 26.6% respectively. The mean LOS in hospital was 12 days, while LOS in the ICU was five days. Of all operations, 23.8% patients were admitted at any time to the ICU postoperatively and the 30-day mortality seen among ICU patients was 37.9%. Mortality was strongly correlated to existing comorbidity, high ASA classification, ICU care and faecal peritonitis. The mean/median time from notification to operate until the first incision was 3:46/3:02 h and 87% of patients had their first incision within 6 h of notification.ConclusionsIn this present Swedish study, high mortality and morbidity were observed after emergency laparotomy, which is in agreement with other recent studies.Trial registrationThe study has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03549624, registered 8 June 2018).

Project description:BackgroundPoor uptake and understanding of critical perioperative information represent a major safety risk for surgical patients. Implementing a patient-driven surgical safety checklist might enhance the way critical information is given and increase patient involvement in their own safety throughout the surgical pathway. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a Surgical Patient Safety Checklist (PASC) for use by surgical patients.MethodThis was a prospective study, involving patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals and elective surgical patients to develop and validate PASC using consensus-building techniques in two Norwegian hospitals. A set of items intended for PASC were rated by patients and then submitted to Content Validation Index (CVI) analyses. Items of low CVI went through a Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA) Hazard Scoring process, as well as a consensus process before they were either kept or discarded. Reliability of patients' PASC ratings was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient analysis. Lastly, the face validity of PASC was investigated through focus group interviews with postoperative patients.ResultsInitial development of PASC resulted in a checklist consisting of two parts, one before (32 items) and one after surgery (26 items). After achieving consensus on the PASC content, 215 surgical patients from six surgical wards rated the items for the CVI analysis on a 1-4 scale and mostly agreed on the content. Five items were removed from the checklist, and six items were redesigned to improve PASCs' user-friendliness. The total Scale-level index/Average (S-CVI/Ave) before revision was 0.83 and 0.86 for pre- and post-operative PASC items, respectively. Following revision, these increased to 0.86 and 0.93, respectively. The PASC items reliability score was 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.98). The qualitative assessment identified that patients who used PASC felt more in control of their situation; this was achieved when PASC was given to them at what they felt was the right time and healthcare professionals took part in its usage.ConclusionMultidisciplinary perioperative care staff and surgical patients agreed upon PASC content, the checklist ratings were reliable, and qualitative assessment suggested good face validity. PASC appears to be a usable and valid checklist for elective surgical patients across specialties.

Project description:ImportanceModification of the World Health Organization's Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a critical component of its implementation. To facilitate the SSC's use, it is important to know how surgical teams modify their SSCs, their reasons for making modifications, and the opportunities and challenges teams face in SSC tailoring.ObjectiveTo study SSC modifications in high-income hospital settings in 5 countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study used semistructured interviews based on the survey used in the quantitative study. Each interviewee was asked a core set of questions and various follow-up questions based on their survey responses. Interviews were conducted from July 2019 to February 2020 in person and online using teleconferencing software. Surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, and hospital administrators from the 5 countries were recruited through a survey and snowball sampling.Main outcomes and measuresInterviewees' attitudes and perceptions on SSC modifications and their perceived impact on operating rooms.ResultsA total of 51 surgical team members and hospital administrators from the 5 countries were interviewed (37 [75%] with >10 years of service; 28 [55%] women). There were 15 (29%) surgeons, 13 (26%) nurses, 15 (29%) anesthesiologists, and 8 (16%) health administrators. Five themes emerged concerning the awareness and involvement in SSC modifications; reasons for modifications; types of modifications; the outcomes of modifications; and perceived barriers to SSC modifications. Based on the interviews, some SSCs may go many years without being revisited or modified. SSCs are modified to ensure they address local issues and standards of practice and that they are fit for purpose. Modifications are also made following adverse events to reduce the risk of reoccurrence. Interviewees described adding, moving, and removing elements from their SSCs, which increased their sense of ownership in their SSC and participation in its performance. Some barriers to modification included leadership and the SSC's inclusion in hospitals' electronic medical record.Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study of surgical team members and administrators, interviewees described addressing contemporary surgical issues through various SSC modifications. The process of SSC modification may improve team cohesion and buy-in in addition to providing opportunities for teams to improve patient safety.

Project description:Past studies have highlighted variation in in-hospital mortality rates among hospitals performing emergency laparotomy for large bowel perforation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether failure to rescue (FTR) contributes to this variability. Patients aged 18 years or over requiring surgery for large bowel perforation between 2013 and 2016 were extracted from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) database. Information on complications were identified using linked Hospital Episode Statistics data and in-hospital deaths from the Office for National Statistics. The FTR rate was defined as the proportion of patients dying in hospital with a recorded complication, and was examined in hospitals grouped as having low, medium or high overall postoperative mortality. Overall, 6413 patients were included with 1029 (16.0 per cent) in-hospital deaths. Some 3533 patients (55.1 per cent) had at least one complication: 1023 surgical (16.0 per cent) and 3332 medical (52.0 per cent) complications. There were 22 in-hospital deaths following a surgical complication alone, 685 deaths following a medical complication alone, 150 deaths following both a surgical and medical complication, and 172 deaths with no recorded complication. The risk of in-hospital death was high among patients who suffered either type of complication (857 deaths in 3533 patients; FTR rate 24.3 per cent): 172 deaths followed a surgical complication (FTR-surgical rate 16.8 per cent) and 835 deaths followed a medical complication (FTR-medical rate of 25.1 per cent). After adjustment for patient characteristics and hospital factors, hospitals grouped as having low, medium or high overall postoperative mortality did not have different FTR rates (P = 0.770). Among patients having emergency laparotomy for large bowel perforation, efforts to reduce the risk of in-hospital death should focus on reducing avoidable complications. There was no evidence of variation in FTR rates across National Health Service hospitals in England.

Project description:BackgroundThe Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) has been shown to reduce perioperative errors and complications and its implementation is recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO). However, it is unknown how widely this intervention is used. We investigated attitudes and factors associated with use of WHO SSC in frontline medical professionals across the globe using a survey distributed through social networks.MethodsA survey of usage and opinions regarding the SSC was posted on the Facebook and Twitter pages of a not-for-profit surgical news website for one month (March 2013). Respondents were grouped into four groups based on their country's Gross National Income: high, upper middle, lower middle and low income. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate how different factors were associated with the use of the SSC.Results6269 medical professionals from 69 countries responded to the survey: most respondents were from lower middle (47.4%) countries, followed by: high (35.0%), upper middle (14.6%), and low (3.0%) income countries. In total, 57.5% reported that they used the WHO SSC perioperatively. Fewer respondents used the WHO SSC in upper middle, lower middle and low income countries (LMICs) compared to high income countries (43.5% vs. 83.5%, p < 0.001). Female (61.3% vs. 56.4% males, p = 0.001), consultant surgeons (59.6% vs. 53.2% interns, p < 0.001) and working in university hospitals (61.4% vs. 53.7% non-university hospitals, p < 0.001) were more likely to use the SSC. Believing the SSC was useful, did not work or caused delays was independently associated with the respondents reported use of the SSC (OR 1.22 95% CI 1.07-1.39; OR 0.47 95% CI 0.36-0.60; OR 0.64 95% CI 0.53-0.77, respectively).ConclusionThis study suggests the use of the WHO SSC is variable across countries, especially in LMICs where it has the most potential to improve patient safety. Critical appraisal of the documented benefits of the WHO SSC may improve its adoption by those not currently using it.

Project description:BackgroundThe WHO Surgical Safety Checklist has a growing evidence base to support its role in improving perioperative safety, although its impact is likely to be directly related to the effectiveness of its implementation. There remains a paucity of documented experience from low-resource settings on Checklist implementation approaches. We report an implementation strategy in a public referral hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, based on consultation, local leadership, formal introduction, and supported supervision with subsequent audit and feedback.MethodsPlanning, implementation and assessment took place from December 2011 to December 2012. The planning phase, from December 2011 until April 2012, involved a multidisciplinary consultative approach using local leaders, volunteer clinicians, and staff from non-governmental organisations, to draw up a locally agreed and appropriate Checklist. Implementation in April 2012 involved formal teaching and discussion, simulation sessions and role play, with supportive supervision following implementation. Assessment was performed using completed Checklist analysis and staff satisfaction questionnaires at one month and further Checklist analysis combined with semi-structured interviews in December 2012.Results and discussionChecklist compliance rates were 83% for general anaesthetics at one month after implementation, with an overall compliance rate of 65% at eight months. There was a decrease in Checklist compliance over the period of the study to less than 20% by the end of the study period. The 'Sign out' section was reported as being the most difficult section of the Checklist to complete, and was missed completely in 21% of cases. The most commonly missed single item was the team introduction at the start of each case. However, we report high staff satisfaction with the Checklist and enthusiasm for its continued use.ConclusionWe report a detailed implementation strategy for introducing the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist to a low-resource setting. We show that this approach can lead to high completion rates and high staff satisfaction, albeit with a drop in completion rates over time. We argue that maximal benefit of the Surgical Safety Checklist is likely to be when it engenders a conversation around patient safety within a department, and when there is local ownership of this process.

Project description:BackgroundCharting is an essential component of professional nursing practice and is arguably a key element of patient safety in surgery: without proper, objective, and timely documentation, both benign and tragical errors can occur. From surgery on wrong patients to wrong limbs, to the omission of antibiotics administration, many harms can happen in the operating room. Documentation has thus served as a safeguard for patient safety, professional responsibility, and professional accountability. In this context, we were puzzled by the practices we observed with respect to charting compliance with the surgical safety checklist (SSC) during a study of surgical teams in a large, urban teaching hospital in Canada (pseudonym 'C&C').MethodsThis article leverages institutional ethnography and a subset of data from a larger study to describe and explain the social organisation of the system that monitored surgical safety compliance at C&C from the standpoint of operating room nurses. This data included fieldnotes from observations of 51 surgical cases, on-the-spot interviews with nurses, formal interviews with individuals who were involved in the design and implementation of the SSC, and open-ended questions from two rounds of survey of OR teams.FindingsWe found that the compliance form and not the SSC itself formed the basis for reporting. To meet hospital accuracy in charting goals and legislated compliance documentation reporting requirements nurses 'pre-charted' compliance with the surgical checklist. The adoption of this workaround technically violated nursing charting principles and put them in ethically untenable positions.ConclusionsDocumenting compliance of the SSC constituted a moral hazard, constrained nurses' autonomy and moral agency, and obscured poor checklist adherence. The findings highlight how local and extra local texts, technologies and relations create ethical issues, raise questions about the effectiveness of resulting data for decision-making and contribute to ongoing conversations about nursing workarounds.

Dataset Information

Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets