Dedicated teams to optimize quality and safety of surgery: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A dedicated operating team is defined as a surgical team consisting of the same group of people working together over time, optimally attuned in both technical and/or communicative aspects. This can be achieved through technical and/or communicative training in a team setting. A dedicated surgical team may contribute to the optimization of healthcare quality and patient safety within the perioperative period. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effects of a dedicated surgical team on clinical and performance outcomes. MEDLINE and Embase were searched on 23 June 2022. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) were included. Primary outcomes were mortality, complications and readmissions. Secondary outcomes were costs and performance measures. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included (RCTs n = 1; NRSs n = 13). Implementation of dedicated operating teams was associated with improvements in mortality, turnover time, teamwork, communication and costs. No significant differences were observed in readmission rates and length of hospital stay. Results regarding duration, glitch counts and complications of surgery were inconclusive. Limitations include study conduct and heterogeneity between studies. CONCLUSIONS: The institution of surgical teams who followed communicative and/or technical training appeared to have beneficial effects on several clinical outcome measures. Dedicated teams provide a feasible way of improving healthcare quality and patient safety. A dose-response effect of team training was reported, but also a relapse rate, suggesting that repetitive training is of major concern to high-quality patient care. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings, due to limited level of evidence in current literature. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020145288.

Implementation fidelity of a clinical medication review intervention: process evaluation.

Background Implementation of clinical medication reviews in daily practice is scarcely evaluated. The Opti-Med intervention applied a structured approach with external expert teams (pharmacist and physician) to conduct medication reviews. The intervention was effective with respect to resolving drug related problems, but did not improve quality of life. Objective The objective of this process evaluation was to gain more insight into the implementation fidelity of the intervention. Setting Process evaluation alongside a cluster randomized trial in 22 general practices and 518 patients of 65 years and over. Method A mixed methods design using quantitative and qualitative data and the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity was used. Implementation fidelity is defined as the degree to which the various components of an intervention are delivered as intended. Main outcome measure Implementation fidelity for key components of the Opti-Med intervention. Results Patient selection and preparation of the medication analyses were carried out as planned, although mostly by the Opti-Med researchers instead of practice nurses. Medication analyses by expert teams were performed as planned, as well as patient consultations and patient involvement. 48% of the proposed changes in the medication regime were implemented. Cooperation between expert teams members and the use of an online decision-support medication evaluation facilitated implementation. Barriers for implementation were time constraints in daily practice, software difficulties with patient selection and incompleteness of medical files. The degree of embedding of the intervention was found to influence implementation fidelity. The total time investment for healthcare professionals was 94 min per patient. Conclusion Overall, the implementation fidelity was moderate to high for all key components of the Opti-Med intervention. The absence of its effectiveness with respect to quality of life could not be explained by insufficient implementation fidelity.