Enhancing Musculoskeletal Injection Safety: Evaluating Checklists Generated by Artificial Intelligence and Revising the Preformed Checklist.

Background Musculoskeletal disorders are a significant global health issue, necessitating advanced management strategies such as intra-articular and extra-articular injections to alleviate pain, inflammation, and mobility challenges. As the adoption of these interventions by physicians grows, the importance of robust safety protocols becomes paramount. This study evaluates the effectiveness of conversational artificial intelligence (AI), particularly versions 3.5 and 4 of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT), in creating patient safety checklists for managing musculoskeletal injections to enhance the preparation of safety documentation. Methodology A quantitative analysis was conducted to evaluate AI-generated safety checklists against a preformed checklist adapted from reputable medical sources. Adherence of the generated checklists to the preformed checklist was calculated and classified. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess the performance differences between ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4. Results ChatGPT-4 showed superior adherence to the preformed checklist compared to ChatGPT-3.5, with both versions classified as very good in safety protocol creation. Although no significant differences were present in the sign-in and sign-out parts of the checklists of both versions, ChatGPT-4 had significantly higher scores in the procedure planning part (p = 0.007), and its overall performance was also higher (p < 0.001). Subsequently, the preformed checklist was revised to incorporate new contributions from ChatGPT. Conclusions ChatGPT, especially version 4, proved effective in generating patient safety checklists for musculoskeletal injections, highlighting the potential of AI to streamline clinical practices. Further enhancements are necessary to fully meet the medical standards.

Barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of surgical safety checklists: A qualitative systematic review.

AIM: Despite the documented benefits of the World Health Organisation Patient Safety Checklist compliance rates with implementation continue to cause risk to patient safety. This qualitative systematic review aimed to explore the reported factors that impact compliance and implementation processes related to surgical safety checklists in perioperative settings. DESIGN: A qualitative systematic review. METHODS: A systematic review using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) approach to synthesize qualitative studies was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases were expansively searched using keywords and subject headings. Articles were assessed using a pre-selected eligibility criterion. Data extraction and quality appraisal was undertaken for all included studies and a meta-aggregation performed. DATA SOURCES: The CINAHL, Medline and Scopus databases were searched in August 2022 and the search was repeated in June 2023. RESULTS: 34 studies were included. Following the synthesis of the findings there were multiple interrelating barriers to checklist compliance that impacted implementation. There were more barriers than enablers reported in existing studies. Enablers included effective leadership, education and training, timely use of audit and feedback, local champions, and the option for local modifications to the surgical checklist. Further research should focus on targeted interventions that improve observed compliance rates to optimize patient safety. CONCLUSION: This qualitative systematic review identified multiple key factors that influenced the uptake of the Surgical Safety Checklist in operating theatres. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Surgeon participation, hierarchical culture, complacency, and duplication of existing safety processes were identified which impacted the use and completion of the checklist.

The PATH to patient safety.

Communication is critical to safe patient care. In this issue of the British Journal of Anaesthesia, Jaulin and colleagues show that use of a Post-Anaesthesia Team Handover (PATH) checklist is associated with fewer hypoxaemia events in the PACU, reduced handover interruptions, and other important metrics related to improved communication. The PATH checklist provides a link within a broader chain of safety checklists and other interventions that comprise a perioperative chain of survival.

Evaluation of electronic health record-integrated digital health tools to engage hospitalized patients in discharge preparation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of electronic health record (EHR)-integrated digital health tools comprised of a checklist and video on transitions-of-care outcomes for patients preparing for discharge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: English-speaking, general medicine patients (>18 years) hospitalized at least 24 hours at an academic medical center in Boston, MA were enrolled before and after implementation. A structured checklist and video were administered on a mobile device via a patient portal or web-based survey at least 24 hours prior to anticipated discharge. Checklist responses were available for clinicians to review in real time via an EHR-integrated safety dashboard. The primary outcome was patient activation at discharge assessed by patient activation (PAM)-13. Secondary outcomes included postdischarge patient activation, hospital operational metrics, healthcare resource utilization assessed by 30-day follow-up calls and administrative data and change in patient activation from discharge to 30 days postdischarge. RESULTS: Of 673 patients approached, 484 (71.9%) enrolled. The proportion of activated patients (PAM level 3 or 4) at discharge was nonsignificantly higher for the 234 postimplementation compared with the 245 preimplementation participants (59.8% vs 56.7%, adjusted OR 1.23 [0.38, 3.96], P = .73). Postimplementation participants reported 3.75 (3.02) concerns via the checklist. Mean length of stay was significantly higher for postimplementation compared with preimplementation participants (10.13 vs 6.21, P < .01). While there was no effect on postdischarge outcomes, there was a nonsignificant decrease in change in patient activation within participants from pre- to postimplementation (adjusted difference-in-difference of -16.1% (9.6), P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: EHR-integrated digital health tools to prepare patients for discharge did not significantly increase patient activation and was associated with a longer length of stay. While issues uncovered by the checklist may have encouraged patients to inquire about their discharge preparedness, other factors associated with patient activation and length of stay may explain our observations. We offer insights for using PAM-13 in context of real-world health-IT implementations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NIH US National Library of Medicine, NCT03116074, clinicaltrials.gov.

Effective Implementation and Utilization of Checklists in Surgical Patient Safety.

The success of patient safety and quality improvement interventions depends, in part, on the effectiveness of implementation. Surgical safety checklists have been introduced into thousands of operating rooms across 6 continents since the debut of the original World Health Organization 19-item checklist in 2008. However, the effect of checklists on patient outcomes has varied. Here, we review 5 examples of large-scale efforts (eg, population level or across health systems) where surgical checklists were introduced into the operating room and the associated effects on patient outcomes. Each experience provides an opportunity to reflect on best practices that inform strategies for effective implementation.

World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist Modification: Do Changes Emphasize Communication and Teamwork?

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization's (WHO) surgical safety checklist is meant to be customized to facilitate local implementation, encourage full-team participation, and promote a culture of safety. Although it has been globally adopted, little is known about the extent of checklist modification and the type of changes made. METHODS: Nonsubspecialty surgical checklists were obtained through online search and targeted hospital requests. A detailed coding scheme was created to capture modifications to checklist content and formatting. Descriptive statistics were performed. RESULTS: Of 155 checklists analyzed, all were modified. Compared with the WHO checklist, those in our sample contained more lines of text (median: 63 [interquartile range: 50-73] versus 56) and items (36 [interquartile range: 30-43] versus 28). A median of 13 new items were added. Items most frequently added included implants/special equipment (added by 84%), deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis/anticoagulation (added by 75%), and positioning (added by 63%). Checklists removed a median of 5 WHO items. The most frequently removed item was the pulse oximeter check (removed in 75%), followed by 4 items (each removed in 39%-48%) that comprise part of the WHO Checklist's "Anticipated Critical Events" section, which is intended for exchanging critical information. The surgeon was not explicitly mentioned in the checklist in 12%; the anesthesiologist/certified registered nurse anesthetist in 14%, the circulator in 10%, and the surgical tech/scrub in 79%. CONCLUSIONS: Checklists are highly modified but often enlarged with items that may not prompt discussion or teamwork. Of concern is the frequent removal of items from the WHO's "Anticipated Critical Events" section.

Office-Based Anesthesia: A Comprehensive Review and 2019 Update.

Over the last 25 years, with an exponential growth in the complexity of patients and procedures in the office-based setting, the topic of patient safety is becoming more fundamental. Current research efforts focus on the implementation of customizable safety checklists for both the patient and provider, and an emergency manual specifically adapted to guide providers though challenging and unexpected emergencies in this unique setting. Additional efforts are focusing on legislative changes and accreditation to standardize and ensure increased accountability and patient safety.

Increasing Completion Rate and Benefits of Checklists: Prospective Evaluation of Surgical Safety Checklists With Smart Glasses.

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated that surgical safety checklists (SSCs) can significantly reduce surgical complications and mortality rates. Such lists rely on traditional posters or paper, and their contents are generic regarding the type of surgery being performed. SSC completion rates and uniformity of content have been reported as modest and widely variable. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and potential of using smart glasses in the operating room to increase the benefits of SSCs by improving usability through contextualized content and, ideally, resulting in improved completion rates. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated and compared 80 preoperative time-out events with SSCs at a major academic medical center between June 2016 and February 2017. Participants were assigned to either a conventional checklist approach (poster, memory, or both) or a smart glasses app running on Google Glass. RESULTS: Four different surgeons conducted 41 checklists using conventional methods (ie, memory or poster) and 39 using the smart glasses app. The average checklist completion rate using conventional methods was 76%. Smart glasses allowed a completion rate of up to 100% with a decrease in average checklist duration of 18%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with alternatives such as posters, paper, and memory, smart glasses checklists are easier to use and follow. The glasses allowed surgeons to use contextualized time-out checklists, which increased the completion rate to 100% and reduced the checklist execution time and time required to prepare the equipment during surgical cases.

Surgeons, sign your site!

Please see related Short report: https://pssjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13037-017-0125-1.

Development, implementation and evaluation of a patient handoff tool to improve safety in orthopaedic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To develop, implement and test the effect of a handoff tool for orthopaedic trauma residents that reduces adverse events associated with the omission of critical information and the transfer of erroneous information. DESIGN: Components of this project included a literature review, resident surveys and observations, checklist development and refinement, implementation and evaluation of impact on adverse events through a chart review of a prospective cohort compared with a historical control group. SETTING: Large teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Findings of a literature review were presented to orthopaedic residents, epidemiologists, orthopaedic surgeons and patient safety experts in face-to-face meetings, during which we developed and refined the contents of a resident handoff tool. The tool was tested in an orthopaedic trauma service and its impact on adverse events was evaluated through a chart review. The handoff tool was developed and refined during the face-to-face meetings and a pilot implementation. Adverse event data were collected on 127 patients (n = 67 baseline period; n = 60 test period). INTERVENTION: A handoff tool for use by orthopaedic residents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Adverse events in patients handed off by orthopaedic trauma residents. RESULTS: After controlling for age, gender and comorbidities, testing resulted in fewer events per person (25-27% reduction; P < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence suggests that our resident handoff tool may contribute to a decrease in adverse events in orthopaedic patients.

Developing and Testing a Vaginal Delivery Safety Checklist.

Communication failures are the most common root causes of perinatal deaths and injuries. We designed and tested a Vaginal Delivery Safety Checklist to improve communication and assist delivery teams' risk assessments and plans for potential complications of vaginal birth. Delivery teams found the checklist easy, convenient, and helpful. Teams completed the checklist within 2 to 3 minutes and showed improved teamwork, communication, and decision making.

Synoptic operative reports enhance documentation of best practices for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of best practices surgical checklists improves patient safety and outcomes. However, documenting performance of these practices can be challenging. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons developed a Best Practices for Rectal Cancer Checklist (RCC) to standardize and improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery. This study compared the degree to which synoptic (SR) and narrative (NR) operative reports document RCC items. METHODS: Two reviewers independently reviewed a cohort of prospectively collected SR for rectal cancer surgery and a case-matched historical cohort of NR. Reports were reviewed for documentation of performance of operative items on the RCC. Abstraction time and inter-rater agreement were also measured. RESULTS: SR scored significantly higher than NR on the overall checklist score (mean adjusted score ± standard deviation 12.4 ± 0.9 vs. 5.7 ± 1.9, maximum possible score 18, P < 0.001). Reviewers abstracted data significantly faster from SR. Inter-rater agreement between reviewers was high for both types of reports. CONCLUSIONS: SR were associated with reliable and more complete and reliable documentation of items on the RCC. Use of an SR system standardizes operative reporting, providing the opportunity to enhance checklist compliance, and enable timely feedback to improve surgical outcomes for rectal cancer patients.

Surgical lessons from the lake.

After circumnavigating Lake Michigan during a sabbatical in the summer of 2011, the lessons learned from this experience and the surgical parallels between boating and life as a surgeon will be discussed. Topics will include the use of surgical checklists, teamwork and communication, leadership, and surgical mentorship.

Designing a safety checklist for dental implant placement: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Complications during and after dental implant placement can be a hindrance to successful treatment. Checklists are emerging as useful tools in error reduction in various fields. The authors selected a Delphi panel to explore the appropriate clinical practices involved in implant placement, with the objective of formulating a safety checklist that would aid in reducing errors. METHODS: The authors administered a Delphi method survey to an expert panel of 24 board-certified periodontists to determine if consensus existed regarding the critical steps involved in implant placement. They defined consensus as 90 percent agreement among participants. Using the Delphi data, the authors designed a safety checklist for implant placement. RESULTS: The panelists generated 20 consensus statements regarding essential steps in implant placement. The authors divided the statements into preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative phases. To determine the rationale for consensus decisions, the authors conducted a thematic qualitative analysis of responses to all open-ended questionnaire items, asking panel members how or why a particular procedure was performed. CONCLUSION: The panelists reached a consensus regarding the steps they considered critical in implant placement. Further research is needed to assess the acceptance and effectiveness of this type of checklist in a clinical setting. Practical Implications. The authors developed a checklist that may be useful in reducing errors in placement of dental implants. If effective, this checklist ultimately will aid in minimizing risk and increasing implant success rates, especially for inexperienced practitioners, dental students, surgical residents and dental implant trainees (that is, dentists undergoing training to place implants through continuing education courses).