Article Text

PDF
Is the Surgical Safety Checklist successfully conducted? An observational study of social interactions in the operating rooms of a tertiary hospital
  1. Stéphane Cullati1,2,
  2. Sophie Le Du1,3,
  3. Anne-Claire Raë4,
  4. Martine Micallef5,
  5. Ebrahim Khabiri6,
  6. Aimad Ourahmoune1,
  7. Armelle Boireaux5,
  8. Marc Licker7,
  9. Pierre Chopard1
  1. 1Quality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  2. 2Institute of Demographic and Life Course Studies, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  3. 3Division of General Internal Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  4. 4University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  5. 5Department of Logistics Care, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  6. 6Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  7. 7Division of Anesthesiology, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  1. Correspondence to Stéphane Cullati, Quality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Rue Gabrielle-Perret-Gentil 4, Geneva CH-1211, Switzerland, stephane.cullati{at}hcuge.ch

Abstract

Objectives To determine whether the items on the Time Out and the Sign Out of the Surgical Safety Checklist are properly checked by operating room (OR) staff and to explore whether the number of checked items is influenced by the severity of the intervention and the use of the checklist as a memory tool during the Time Out and the Sign Out periods.

Methods From March to July 2010, data were collected during elective surgery at the Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. The main outcome was to assess whether each item of the Time Out and the Sign Out checklists have been checked, that is, ‘confirmed’ by at least one member of the team and ‘validated’ by at least one other member of the team. The secondary outcome was the number of validated items during the Time Out and the Sign Out.

Results Time Outs (N=80) and Sign Outs (N=81) were conducted quasi systematically (99%). Items were mostly confirmed during the Time Out (range 100–72%) but less often during the Sign Out (range 86–19%). Validation of the items was far from optimal: only 13% of Time Outs and 3% of Sign Outs were properly checked (all items validated). During the Time Out, the validation process was significantly improved among the highest risk interventions (29% validation vs 15% among interventions at lower risk). During the Sign Out, a similar effect was observed (19% and 8%, respectively). A small but significant benefit was observed when using a printed checklist as a memory tool during the Sign Out, the proportion of interventions with almost all validated items being higher compared with those without the memory tool (20% and 0%, respectively).

Conclusions Training on the proper completion of the checklist must be provided to OR teams. The severity of the interventions influenced the number of items properly checked.

  • Checklists
  • Audit and Feedback
  • Communication
  • Quality Improvement
  • Teams

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.