Articles: checklist.
-
Emerg Med Australas · Oct 2019
The World Health Organization trauma checklist versus Trauma Team Time-out: A perspective.
Time-out protocols have reportedly improved team dynamics and patients' safety in various clinical settings - particularly in the operating room. In 2016, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced a Trauma Care checklist, which outlines steps to follow immediately after the primary and secondary surveys and prior to the team leaving the patient. ⋯ The WHO Trauma Care checklist, while likely to be successful in reducing errors of omission related to hospital admission, may be limited in its ability to reduce errors that occur in the initial 30 min of trauma reception - when most of the life-saving decisions are made. To address this limitation a Trauma Team Time-out protocol is proposed for initial trauma resuscitation, targeting the critical first 30 min of hospital reception.
-
Observational Study
The effects of an aviation-style computerised pre-induction anaesthesia checklist on pre-anaesthetic set-up and non-routine events.
There is ever greater interest in mitigating medical errors, particularly through cognitive aids and checklist-system long-used in the aviation industry.
Jelacic and team instituted a computerised pre-induction checklist, using an observational before-and-after study design across 1,570 cases. This is the first study of a computerised anaesthesia checklist in a real clinical environment.
They found an absolute risk reduction of almost 4% of failure-to-perform critical pre-induction steps, along with reduction in non-routine events and several examples of pre-induction mistake identification through checklist use.
Although the researchers claim the results “strongly argue for the routine use of a pre-induction anaesthesia checklist” this overstates the case a little. This study, like many similar, struggles with confounder effects on anaesthesia vigilance that may explain some of the results, particularly as arising from observational, non-randomised, non-blinded research.
Be careful
The challenge for cognitive aid research is that commonly it must use surrogate markers (workflow step failure; behavioural deviations; efficiency; time spent on task etc.) rather than the safety outcomes that actually matter to patients: death and injury.
There is no easy way around this other than large multi-center studies focusing on outcomes, such as the WHO surgical safety checklist study – which even then, has not escaped criticism!
Thinking deeper...
There will continue to be tension between those pro-checklist and those against. The irony is that both camps share a similar rationale for their position: the advocates for routine checklists point to the safety benefits of reducing cognitive load, whereas those opposing argue that enforced use is anti-individual and itself adds additional task and cognitive burden for clinicians.
summary -
Journal of patient safety · Sep 2019
Objective Assessment of Checklist Fidelity Using Digital Audio Recording and a Standardized Scoring System Audit.
The use of the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) has been reported to significantly reduce operative morbidity and mortality rates. Recent findings have cast doubt on the efficacy of such checklists in improving patient safety. The effectiveness of surgical safety checklists cannot be fully measured or understood without an accurate assessment of implementation fidelity, most effectively through direct observations of the checklist process. Here, we describe the use of a secure audio recording protocol in conjunction with a novel standardized scoring system to assess checklist compliance rates. ⋯ The use of a secure digital audio recording protocol is a simple yet effective tool for observing checklist performance. Moreover, the implementation of a standardized scoring system allows for the objective evaluation of checklist fidelity. Together, they provide a powerful auditing tool for identifying improvement.
-
It is human nature to make mistakes, all people in all works make errors, but an amputation of the wrong leg or an inadvertently retained needle in the abdominal cavity are unanticipated incidents, that no physician in the world wants to experience. Such catastrophic events, except for the consequences on the patient's health and the physician's career, have severe financial implications on the healthcare system. ⋯ Despite its effectiveness in increasing patient safety, compliance issues remain a major problem in its implementation and gaps in its daily use still occur. The current review presents patterns of wrong time-out procedures, emphasizes the problem of poor compliance and reviews the suggested strategies to increase compliance for safer operating rooms.
-
1)We recommend that providers should be familiar with the operation of their specific ultrasound machine prior to initiation of a vascular access procedure. 2)We recommend that providers should use a high-frequency linear transducer with a sterile sheath and sterile gel to perform vascular access procedures. 3)We recommend that providers should use two-dimensional ultrasound to evaluate for anatomical variations and absence of vascular thrombosis during preprocedural site selection. 4)We recommend that providers should evaluate the target blood vessel size and depth during preprocedural ultrasound evaluation. ⋯ 23) To reduce the risk of mechanical and infectious complications, we recommend that novice providers should complete a systematic training program that includes a combination of simulation-based practice, supervised insertion on patients, and evaluation by an expert operator before attempting ultrasound-guided CVC insertion independently on patients. 24)We recommend that cognitive training in ultrasound-guided CVC insertion should include basic anatomy, ultrasound physics, ultrasound machine knobology, fundamentals of image acquisition and interpretation, detection and management of procedural complications, infection prevention strategies, and pathways to attain competency. 25)We recommend that trainees should demonstrate minimal competence before placing ultrasound-guided CVCs independently. A minimum number of CVC insertions may inform this determination, but a proctored assessment of competence is most important. 26)We recommend that didactic and hands-on training for trainees should coincide with anticipated times of increased performance of vascular access procedures. Refresher training sessions should be offered periodically. 27)We recommend that competency assessments should include formal evaluation of knowledge and technical skills using standardized assessment tools. 28)We recommend that competency assessments should evaluate for proficiency in the following knowledge and skills of CVC insertion: (a) Knowledge of the target vein anatomy, proper vessel identification, and recognition of anatomical variants; (b) Demonstration of CVC insertion with no technical errors based on a procedural checklist; (c) Recognition and management of acute complications, including emergency management of life-threatening complications; (d) Real-time needle tip tracking with ultrasound and cannulation on the first attempt in at least five consecutive simulation. 29)We recommend a periodic proficiency assessment of all operators should be conducted to ensure maintenance of competency.