Going beyond compliance: A qualitative study of the practice of surgical safety checklist.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a tool designed to enhance team communication and patient safety. When used properly, the SSC acts as a layer of defence against never events. In this study, we performed secondary qualitative analysis of operating theatres (OT) SSC observational notes to examine how the SSC was used after an intensive SSC re-implementation effort and drew on relevant theories to shed light on the observed patterns of behaviours. We aimed to go beyond assessing checklist compliance and to understand potential sociopsychological mechanisms of the variations in SSC practices. METHODS: Direct observation notes of 109 surgical procedures across 13 surgical disciplines were made by two trained nurses in the OT of a large tertiary hospital in Singapore from February to April 2022, three months after SSC re-implementation. Only notes relevant to the use of SSC were extracted and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Data were coded following an inductive process to identify themes or patterns of SSC practices. These patterns were subsequently interpreted against a relevant theory to appreciate the potential sociopsychological forces behind them. RESULTS: Two broad types of SSC practices and their respective sub-themes were identified. Type 1 (vs. Type 2) SSC practices are characterized by patience and thoroughness (vs. hurriedness and omission) in carrying out the SSC process, dedication and attention (vs. delegation and distraction) to the SSC safety checks, and frequent (vs. absence of) safety voices during the conduct of SSC. These patterns were conceptualized as safety-seeking action vs. ritualistic action using Merton's social deviance theory. CONCLUSION: Ritualistic practice of the SSC can undermine surgical safety by creating conditions conducive to never events. To fully realize the SSC's potential as an essential tool for communication and safety, a concerted effort is needed to balance thoroughness with efficiency. Additionally, fostering a culture of collaboration and collegiality is crucial to reinforce and enhance the culture of surgical safety.

Transforming Team Performance Through Reimplementation of the Surgical Safety Checklist.

Importance: Patient safety interventions, like the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist, require effective implementation strategies to achieve meaningful results. Institutions with underperforming checklists require evidence-based guidance for reimplementing these practices to maximize their impact on patient safety. Objective: To assess the ability of a comprehensive system of safety checklist reimplementation to change behavior, enhance safety culture, and improve outcomes for surgical patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective type 2 hybrid implementation-effectiveness study took place at 2 large academic referral centers in Singapore. All operations performed at either hospital were eligible for observation. Surveys were distributed to all operating room staff. Intervention: The study team developed a comprehensive surgical safety checklist reimplementation package based on the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework. Best practices from implementation science and human factors engineering were combined to redesign the checklist. The revised instrument was reimplemented in November 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Implementation outcomes included penetration and fidelity. The primary effectiveness outcome was team performance, assessed by trained observers using the Oxford Non-Technical Skills (NOTECH) system before and after reimplementation. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture was used to assess safety culture and observers tracked device-related interruptions (DRIs). Patient safety events, near-miss events, 30-day mortality, and serious complications were tracked for exploratory analyses. Results: Observers captured 252 cases (161 baseline and 91 end point). Penetration of the checklist was excellent at both time points, but there were significant improvements in all measures of fidelity after reimplementation. Mean NOTECHS scores increased from 37.1 to 42.4 points (4.3 point adjusted increase; 95% CI, 2.9-5.7; P < .001). DRIs decreased by 86.5% (95% CI, -22.1% to -97.8%; P = .03). Significant improvements were noted in 9 of 12 composite areas on culture of safety surveys. Exploratory analyses suggested reductions in patient safety events, mortality, and serious complications. Conclusions and Relevance: Comprehensive reimplementation of an established checklist intervention can meaningfully improve team behavior, safety culture, patient safety, and patient outcomes. Future efforts will expand the reach of this system by testing a structured guidebook coupled with light-touch implementation guidance in a variety of settings.

CheckPOINT: a simple tool to measure Surgical Safety Checklist implementation fidelity.

INTRODUCTION: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a communication tool that improves teamwork and patient outcomes. SSC effectiveness is dependent on implementation fidelity. Administrative audits fail to capture most aspects of SSC implementation fidelity (ie, team communication and engagement). Existing research tools assess behaviours during checklist performance, but were not designed for routine quality assurance and improvement. We aimed to create a simple tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity, and to test its reliability using video simulations, and usability in clinical practice. METHODS: The Checklist Performance Observation for Improvement (CheckPOINT) tool underwent two rounds of face validity testing with surgical safety experts, clinicians and quality improvement specialists. Four categories were developed: checklist adherence, communication effectiveness, attitude and engagement. We created a 90 min training programme, and four trained raters independently scored 37 video simulations using the tool. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess inter-rater reliability (ICC>0.75 indicating excellent reliability). We then trained two observers, who tested the tool in the operating room. We interviewed the observers to determine tool usability. RESULTS: The CheckPOINT tool had excellent inter-rater reliability across SSC phases. The ICC was 0.83 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98) for the sign-in, 0.77 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.92) for the time-out and 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.99) for the sign-out. During field testing, observers reported CheckPOINT was easy to use. In 98 operating room observations, the total median (IQR) score was 25 (23-28), checklist adherence was 7 (6-7), communication effectiveness was 6 (6-7), attitude was 6 (6-7) and engagement was 6 (5-7). CONCLUSIONS: CheckPOINT is a simple and reliable tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity and identify areas of focus for improvement efforts. Although CheckPOINT would benefit from further testing, it offers a low-resource alternative to existing research tools and captures elements of adherence and team behaviours.

Implementation of a Device Briefing Tool reduces interruptions in surgery: A nonrandomized controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Interruptions in operative flow are known to increase team stress and errors in the operating room. Device-related interruptions are an increasing area of focus for surgical safety, but common safety processes such as the Surgical Safety Checklist do not adequately address surgical devices. We assessed the impact of the Device Briefing Tool, a communication instrument for surgical teams, on device-related interruptions in a large academic referral center in Singapore. METHODS: The Device Briefing Tool was implemented in 4 general surgery departments, with 4 additional departments serving as a comparator group. Trained observers evaluated device-related interruption incidence in live operations at baseline and after implementation. Changes in device-related interruption frequency were assessed in each group using Poisson regression, with and without adjustment for surgical department and device complexity. Subgroup analyses assessed the impact of the Device Briefing Tool by device type. RESULTS: A total of 210 operations were evaluated by observers. In the Device Briefing Tool group, there were 38.6 and 27.2 device-related interruptions per 100 cases at baseline and after Device Briefing Tool implementation, respectively (difference -23%, P = .0047, adjusted difference -28%, P = .0013). Device-related interruption frequency in the comparator group remained stable across study periods. Point estimates indicated reductions in device-related interruptions for all device types, reaching statistical significance for circular staplers (-26%, P = .0049). CONCLUSION: Implementation of the Device Briefing Tool was associated with a 28% reduction in device-related interruptions. Proactive approaches to improving surgical device safety are crucial in the technology-driven landscape of modern surgical care. Future efforts will assess formal integration of the Device Briefing Tool into institution-wide surgical safety processes.