Seen through the patients' eyes: surgical safety and checklists.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to explore the views patients have towards surgical safety and checklists. As a secondary aim, we explored if previous experience of error or other patient characteristics influence these views. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey study design was applied. PARTICIPANTS: The Flemish Patients' Platform network and social media were used to recruit participants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): An 11-item questionnaire was designed to assess the following constructs: perception of surgical safety, attitudes towards the WHO surgical safety checklist and attitudes regarding checklist usage. RESULTS: Respondents' view (N = 444) on the risk of an adverse event showed considerable variation. Respondents were positive towards the checklist, strongly agreeing that it would impact positively on their safety. However, this positive perception did not translate into an attitude where patients will actively inform themselves whether a checklist is used. The majority of respondents have no difficulty with repetitive verification of identity, procedure and location of the surgery. Respondents with a clinical background were the least anxious. Views were divided regarding hearing discussions around blood loss or airway problems. CONCLUSIONS: Patients perceive the checklist as a reliable safety tool. They do not mind repetitive verification of identity and procedure. However, hearing staff discussing specific, explicit, risks could cause anxiousness in some patients. Building a supportive and collaborative environment is needed to involve and empower patients to contribute in the realization of a safe hospital environment.

A tailored intervention to improving the quality of intrahospital nursing handover.

INTRODUCTION: Nursing handover is a process central to the delivery of high-quality and safe care. We aimed to improve the quality of nursing handover from the emergency department to ward and intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A quasi-experimental non-equivalent control group pre-test - post-test design was applied. Handover quality was measured using the Handover Evaluation Scale (HES). A tailored intervention, inspired by appreciative inquiry, was designed to improve the implementation of an existing handover form and procedure. RESULTS: In total 130 nurses participated, 66 before and 64 after the intervention. Initial structure of the HES showed no good fit to our data; the questions were reshaped into 3 dimensions: Quality of information, Interaction and support, and Relevance of information. Following the intervention, mean changes in HES factor scores ranged from -3.99 to +15.9. No significant difference in factor scoring by ward and ICU nurses was found. Emergency department nurses, however, perceived Interaction and support to be improved following the intervention. CONCLUSION: The intervention did not result in an improved perception of handover quality by ward and ICU nurses. There was improvement in the perception of Interaction and support among emergency department nurses. The intervention positively effected teamwork and mutual understanding concerning nursing handover practice amongst emergency nurses. In order to improve intrahospital nursing handover, hospital-wide interventions are suggested. These interventions should be aimed at creating a generative story, improving mutual understanding, and establishing a supportive attitude regarding standardised procedures to reduce human error.

Barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of surgical safety checklists: a systematic review of the qualitative evidence.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to obtain a better understanding of the user-related barriers against, and facilitators for, the implementation of surgical safety checklists. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for articles describing stakeholders' perspectives regarding, and experiences with, the implementation of surgical safety checklists. The quality of the papers was assessed by means of the Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument. Thematic synthesis was used to integrate the emergent descriptive themes into overall analytical themes. RESULTS: The synthesis of 18 qualitative studies indicated that implementation requires change in the workflow of healthcare professionals as well as in their perception of the checklist and the perception of patient safety in general. The factors impeding or advancing the required change concentrated around the checklist, the implementation process and the local context. We found that the required safety checks disrupt operating theatre staffs' routines. Furthermore, conflicting priorities and different perspectives and motives of stakeholders complicate checklist implementation. When approaching the checklist as a simple technical intervention, the expectation of cooperation between surgeons, anaesthetists and nurses is often not addressed, reducing the checklist to a tick-off exercise. CONCLUSIONS: The complex reality in which the checklist needs to be implemented requires an approach that includes more than eliminating barriers and supporting facilitating factors. Implementation leaders must facilitate team learning to foster the mutual understanding of perspectives and motivations, and the realignment of routines. This paper provides a pragmatic overview of the user-related barriers and facilitators upon which theories, hypothesising potential change strategies and interactions, can be developed and tested empirically.