Ward simulation to improve surgical ward round performance: a randomized controlled trial of a simulation-based curriculum.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the effects of a simulation-based curriculum for ward-based care on ward round (WR) performance. BACKGROUND: Variability in surgical outcomes does not relate to surgical skill alone. Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of peri- and postoperative morbidity are dependent on provision of high-quality ward-based care. The focal point of this is the surgical WR. Although WR conduct is learned primarily through experience, a simulated environment and validated assessment tools may enable measurement and enhancement of WR quality. METHODS: Junior surgical residents were randomized either to a half-day educational intervention with lectures, structured feedback, and debriefing, or to standard practice (control). All conducted a standardized, validated, simulated WR of 3 patients. Surgical Ward Care Assessment Tool and W-NOTECHS rating scales were used for technical and nontechnical skills assessment, respectively, and compared between groups. Subjects completed pre- and posttest confidence questionnaires and feedback forms. RESULTS: Twenty-nine trainees were randomized to intervention (n = 14) or control (n = 15). Baseline confidence and demographics were equal between groups. Intervention group demonstrated better patient assessment: 63.5 ± 8.1% (control) versus 79.8 ± 11.9% (P = 0.002), management 56.0% ± 19.7% versus 72.2 ± 10.3% (P = 0.014), and nontechnical skills: W-NOTECHS 17.75 ± 2.06 versus 23.33 ± 1.21 (P < 0.001). Hundred percent of subjects felt that the curriculum improved their practice. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting WRs is a crucial skill but not currently subject to formal training. Implementation of a comprehensive curriculum for surgical WRs led to significant improvement in quality of patient assessment, management, and nontechnical skills. Improved WR performance may lead to earlier identification and amelioration of complications and improve patient outcomes.

Identifying and addressing preventable process errors in trauma care.

BACKGROUND: Management of the acute trauma patient is complex, with potential for error and adverse events. Avoidable injuries and deaths are not well understood. Analysis of error incidence, type, and severity can aid in greater understanding of the root causes and guide future development of error reduction strategies. METHODS: Weekly case review meetings for a UK trauma center were retrospectively reviewed over 1 year. Errors were identified and corroborated with case-note review by a reviewer blinded to any identified events. All events were classified according to the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organisations taxonomy and were typified as structural or process errors and omission or commission errors. RESULTS: A total of 1,752 major trauma patients were admitted over the study period, and 169 preventable errors were identified through analysis of case review meetings and case-note review. Clear patient harm was identified in 3.6 % of cases, with risk of harm in 30 %. Most errors occurred during the initial phase of care in the emergency department (51 %) and resulted most commonly in delays (56 %). The majority of errors were identified as process-related (88 %), with 62 % of them considered errors of omission. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports error incidence in trauma and typifies them according to type and root cause. It identifies process errors and errors of omission in particular as the most common recurring events. Error theory suggests that protocols or checklists may most effectively address these errors. Further study should be prospective and may aid in the development of such interventions.

Results of a simple intervention to improve documentation quality in major trauma.

OBJECTIVES: Accurate and thorough documentation is an important part of medical care, providing a legally binding historical record of events and means of communication. Trauma is a complex multidisciplinary environment, in which documentation is particularly important, but can be poor as a result. We investigate the effect of introducing a proforma documentation booklet, acting as a physical prompt to ensure full patient assessment, as well as full documentation, on documentation quality. METHODS: A case note review of all major trauma patients admitted over 12 months at a district hospital was performed by clinicians with case note review experience 6 months before and after introduction of a trauma booklet. Documentation quality was assessed, as was the presence of complete trauma teams. RESULTS: A total of 297 consecutive trauma patients over 12 months were reviewed: 136 patients preintervention and 161 patients after implementation of the trauma booklet. Use of a trauma booklet significantly increased the rate of primary survey documentation [82.8% (114/136) vs. 98.8% (159/161), χ P<0.001]. Similar results were seen for documented completion of secondary surveys [39% (53/136) vs. 66.5% (107/161), P<0.001]. Following implementation of a trauma booklet, a significant increase in full trauma team presence was observed (43.4 vs. 67.1%, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the potential of the introduction of a structured proforma to significantly improve documentation quality in major trauma. In the future, all hospitals accepting trauma patients could benefit from the introduction of similar proformas.

Laparoscopic vs open approach to resection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with known cirrhosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To review the currently available literature comparing laparoscopic to open resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with known liver cirrhosis. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was conducted. The search terms used included (laparoscopic OR laparoscopy) AND (hepatic or liver) AND (surgery or resection) AND "hepatocellular carcinoma" AND (cirrhosis or cirrhotic). Furthermore, to widen the search, we also used the "related articles" section. Studies reporting a comparison of outcomes and methods of open vs laparoscopic hepatic resection for HCC in patients with liver cirrhosis were included. Meta-analysis of results was performed using a random effects model to compute relative risk (RR) and for dichotomous variables and standard mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients from 4 cohort studies were included in final analysis. Patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures had statistically less blood loss compared to the open cohort, SMD of -1.01 (95%CI: -1.23-0.79), P < 0.001, with a reduced risk of transfusion, RR = 0.19 (95%CI: 0.09-0.38), P < 0.001. A wider clearance at tumour resection margins was achieved following a laparoscopic approach, SMD of 0.34 (95%CI: 0.08-0.60), P = 0.011. No significant difference was noted between laparoscopic and open resection operative times, SMD of -0.15 (95%CI: 0.35-0.05), P = 0.142. The overall RR of suffering from postoperative morbidity is 0.25 in favour of the open surgery cohort (95%CI: 0.17-0.37), P < 0.001. Patients under-going laparoscopic surgery had significantly shorter length of stays in hospital compared to the open cohort, SMD of -0.53 (95%CI: -0.73 to -0.32), P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that laparoscopic resection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis is safe and may provide improved patient outcomes when compared to the open technique.

A growing problem: implications of obesity on the provision of trauma care.

The incidences of both trauma and obesity are rapidly on the rise. Whilst dedicated trauma centres exist, these may not be equipped to manage obese and super-obese patients' unique medical and surgical demands. This review assesses the impact of trauma on the obese patient and the specialist considerations required in their management throughout pre-hospital, acute and inpatient phases of trauma care. Specific recommendations for the necessary infrastructure and equipment are made to ensure optimal care of the obese trauma patient. We also review evidence-based best practice in the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of this patient group. Only by addressing the unique needs of obese trauma patients with specialist education, equipment and infrastructure can optimal patient outcomes be assured.