8 research outputs found

    Attitudes towards the surgical safety checklist and factors associated with its use : a global survey of frontline medical professionals:a global survey of frontline medical professionals

    Get PDF
    Background: The 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. Methods: A 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. Results: 6269 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). Conclusion: This 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

    Presentation to Peer-Review Publication

    No full text

    ‘Every Patient, Every Day’:a daily ward round tool to improve patient safety and experience

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: Many essential interventions are required to ensure in-patients receive safe and effective care with a good experience. In addition, healthcare organisations are assessed on numerous performance indicators, including the aforementioned interventions, where underperformance can lead to lower publicly reported ratings, loss of income and reputational damage. Most importantly, underperformance can lead to compromised patient experience and outcomes. We created a prompt card as a service improvement tool to be used on the daily ward rounds at the bedside of every patient, entitled ‘every patient, every day’ to improve documentation, antibiotic prescribing, venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, coding and patient communication. METHOD: Preimplementation data around these interventions and patient experience factors were collected by shadowing ward rounds. The ‘every patient, every day’ tool was then implemented. The ward rounds were shadowed by the same individual to collect post-implementation data. Effect of implementation was assessed via Poisson regression models conducted on the documentation, antibiotics and VTE measures, and logistic regression models conducted on the communication and coding measures. RESULTS: The corresponding rate ratios for the effect of the implementation of the service improvement tool were found to be 1.53 (95% CI 1.38 to 1.69) for improved documentation. Antibiotics prescribing improved by 1.44 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.94). VTE prescribing and documentation improved by a rate ratio 1.25 (95% 1.04 to 1.50). For communication, the effect of the implementation was significant at the 5% significance level (p<0.001), with an OR of 18.6 (95% CI 8.41 to 41.09). Coding effect was non-significant at the 5% significance level (p=0.113) but was substantive. Implementation of the tool resulted in substantive improvements in all outcomes and shows corrected significance with the documentation and communication outcomes. CONCLUSION: The ‘every patient, every day’ ward round prompt card is an extraordinarily simple tool shown to increase compliance with a number of safety and quality indicators to improve an organisation’s performance, and hopefully be a facet contributing to enhanced patient experience and outcomes
    corecore