• A Fourcade, E Minvielle, J-L Blache, and J-L Bourgain.
• Cermes, unité INSERM U 988, institut Gustave-Roussy, Villejuif, France.
• Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2011 Jun 1;30(6):495-500.

IntroductionThe use of WHO checklist has been associated to a decrease of complication incidence and mortality. This control is mandatory since January the 1st 2010. Evaluation of the quality of documentation is important and includes filling rate, which is a reflexion of participant adhesion and analysis of the circumstances where the team answers "no" during the control.MethodsThis study concerned 17 among 20 French cancer centres. Percentage of documented checklist, exhaustivity of the answers in each checklist and "no" answers have been compared during two periods: January 2010 and October 2010.ResultsRate of filled document is satisfactory and stable during the two periods (95.5% versus 95.8%). Exhaustivity was slightly better during the second period (64 and 68%, P=0,039). Nevertheless, variability between centres was large; one centre improved and four centres worsened their scores. Rate of "no" answers was low and increased during the second period (1.5% in January 1.9% in October P<0.001). They mainly concerned antibiotic administration and at a lesser degree bleeding risk, the name of the procedure, equipment problem to be addressed and postoperative management.DiscussionThere is a large discrepancy between centres and for a given centre in reporting quality. Significant progress should be expected using target improvement. This approach implies multiple critical analysis of checklist content in each hospital and in multicentre enquiries.Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

13 keywords...

hide…