Search

To preserve the bladder without compromising survival, further treatments need to be optimized to prevent the recurrence and progression of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. In clinical practice, transurethral resection of bladder tumors is essential for bladder cancer management. The primary goal of surgery is to achieve accurate pathological evaluation and complete resection of bladder cancer; high resection quality is required for the procedure. A representative surrogate indicator of the resection quality is the presence of the detrusor muscle in the resection specimen. Therefore, complete visual resection of bladder cancer with a muscle layer is crucial for decreasing the recurrence and progression rates of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. However, this procedure is complex and requires sufficient experience and knowledge to be performed thoroughly, safely, and efficiently. Surgical checklists represent an approach to filling the knowledge and experience gaps and improving the quality and safety of surgery. By checking items during transurethral resection, it is expected that the recording of risk factors related to recurrence and progression will improve, the rate of visually complete resection with muscles will increase, and the rate of intravesical recurrence will decrease. The simplicity of checklists is an additional benefit. In recent years, surgical checklists have received increasing attention in order to achieve high-quality resections and reduce disparities between surgeons and institutions. This literature review outlines the evolving treatment strategies for patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, focusing on surgical checklists for the transurethral resection of bladder tumors., (© 2024 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Introduction: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a substantial healthcare burden in low- and middle- income countries. "Clean Cut" is a checklist-based infection prevention and control (IPC) program intended to improve compliance to peri-operative IPC standards. We aim to study the short-term and long-term impact of its implementation in a tertiary care cancer referral center. Methods: This was a single institute, prospective interventional study. Patients undergoing elective head-neck surgical procedures were included. The "Clean Cut" program consisting of surveillance, audits, and IPC training was implemented for 6 months, after which there was no active oversight. Post-intervention (T2) and 1-year follow-up (T3) data regarding compliance to core IPC practices and SSI rates were compared with baseline (T1). Results: One hundred eighty six patients were included with 50 (26.9%), 86 (46.2%), and 50 (26.9%) patients at T1, T2, and T3, respectively. At baseline, teams complied with a mean of 3.56 of the six critical components of infection control processes which rose to 4.66 (p < 0.001) at T2, but decreased to 4.02 at T3 (p = 0.053). The SSI rate at baseline decreased significantly after Clean Cut implementation [16 (32%) vs. 12 (13.95%), p = 0.012], but returned to baseline levels after 1 year [17 (34%), p = 0.006]. Conclusion: Implementation of the "Clean Cut" program increases compliance to infection control processes and reduces SSI rates in the short term. Without continuing oversight, these rates return to baseline values after 1 year.

Surgical procedures pose an immense risk to patients, which can lead to various complications and adverse events. In order to safeguard patients' safety, the World Health Organization initiated the implementation of the Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) in operating theatres worldwide. The aim of this integrative review was to summarize and evaluate the use and implementation of SSC, focusing on facilitators and barriers at the individual, professional, and organizational levels. This review followed closely the integrative review method by Whittemore and Knafl. An English literature search was conducted across three electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE) and other hand search references. Keywords search included: 'acute care', 'surgical', 'adult patients', 'pre-operative', 'intra-operative', and 'post-operative'. A total of 816 articles were screened by two reviewers independently and all articles that met the pre-specified inclusion criteria were retained. Data extracted from the articles were categorized, compared, and further analysed. A total of 34 articles were included with the majority being observational studies in developed and European countries. Checklists had been adopted in various surgical specialities. Findings indicated that safety checklists improved team cohesion and communication, resulting in enhanced patient safety. This resulted in high compliance rates as healthcare workers expressed the benefits of SSC to facilitate safety within operating theatres. Barriers included manpower limitations, hierarchical culture, lack of staff involvement and training, staff resistance, and appropriateness of checklist. Common facilitators and barriers at individual, professional, and organizational levels have been identified. Staff training and education, conducive workplace culture, timely audits, and appropriate checklist adaptations are crucial components for a successful implementation of the SSC. Methods have also been introduced to counter barriers of SSC., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The team timeout (TTO) is a safety checklist to be performed by the surgical team prior to incision. Exchange of critical information is, however, important not only before but also during an operation and members of surgical teams frequently feel insufficiently informed by the operating surgeon about the ongoing procedure. To improve the exchange of critical information during surgery, the StOP?-protocol was developed: At appropriate moments during the procedure, the leading surgeon briefly interrupts the operation and informs the team about the current Status (St) and next steps/objectives (O) of the operation, as well as possible Problems (P), and encourages questions of other team members (?). The StOP?-protocol draws attention to the team. Anticipating the occurrence of StOP?-protocols may support awareness of team processes and quality issues from the beginning and thus support other interventions such as the TTO; however, it also may signal an additional demand and contribute to a phenomenon akin to "checklist fatigue." We investigated if, and how, the introduction of the StOP?-protocol influenced TTO quality., Methods: This was a prospective intervention study employing a pre-post design. In the visceral surgical departments of two university hospitals and one urban hospital the quality of 356 timeouts (out of 371 included operation) was assessed by external observers before (154) and after (202) the introduction of the StOP?-briefing. Timeout quality was rated in terms of timeout completeness (number of checklist items mentioned) and timeout quality (engagement, pace, social atmosphere, noise)., Results: As compared to the baseline, after the implementation of the StOP?-protocol, observed timeouts had higher completeness ratings ( F  = 8.69, p  = 0.003) and were rated by observers as higher in engagement ( F  = 13.48, p  < 0.001), less rushed ( F  = 14.85, p  < 0.001), in a better social atmosphere ( F  = 5.83, p  < 0.016) and less noisy ( F  = 5.35, p  < 0.022)., Conclusion: Aspects of TTO are affected by the anticipation of StOP?-protocols. However, rather than harming the timeout goals by inducing "checklist fatigue," it increases completeness and quality of the team timeout., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Timm-Holzer, Tschan, Keller, Semmer, Zimmermann, Huber, Hübner, Candinas, Demartines, Weber and Beldi.)

Introduction: The Russian invasion of Ukraine has caused huge damage to all medical infrastructure and impairs patient safety. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of implementation of the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and Anesthesia Equipment Checklist on patient outcomes and adherence to safety standards in low-resource settings, affected by an ongoing war., Material and Methods: A prospective multicenter study was conducted in 6 large Ukrainian hospitals. The study was conducted in two phases: a control period, lasting five months, followed by a study period, when the two checklists (the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and Anesthetic Equipment Checklist) were introduced in the designated operating rooms. The primary outcomes were any major complications, including death, during 30 days after surgery., Results: A total of 2237 surgical procedures were recorded - 1178 in the control group and 1059 in the intervention group. Major postoperative complications occurred in 82 (6.9%) patients in the control group and in 25 (2.4%) in the study group (OR = 0.32 [0.19-0.52], P < 0.001). The effect on the incidence of specific postoperative complications was statistically significant for the "surgical infection" (1.5% vs. 0.1%; OR = 0.31 [0.1-0.8], P = 0.01) and "reoperation" (1.7% vs. 0.5%; OR = 0.32 [0.1-0.8], P = 0.01) cate-gories as well as for the 30-day mortality (1.3% vs. 0.3%; OR = 0.35 [0.1-0.9], P = 0.03). Better adherence to basic WHO surgical safety recommendations was observed for every check mentioned in the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist ( P < 0.05)., Conclusions: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and the Anesthesia Equipment Checklist improve patient outcomes in war-affected low-resource settings.

The review is devoted to mostly international data on patient safety during surgical procedures. The author emphasizes surgical safety checklist for surgical interventions as a tool developed by the WHO team. The principal objective of this document is protection of patients from harm following unintended misses and casual circumstances. The author tried to explain the basic principles and ideas underlying the checklist procedure. An importance of understanding the process by administration and surgical team is emphasized because its absence deprives this non-complicated and helpful procedure of necessary sense. The problems of patient safety in hospitals of the Russian Federation are also discussed.

Objective: To assess attitudes and perceptions from nursing staff, surgeons and anesthetists about compliance, utility, and impact on patient's safety of the surgical checklist in a teaching hospital. We also aimed to identify improvement opportunities for strengthening the usefulness of the checklist in the operating theater., Methods: We carried out a questionnaire-based an observational cross-sectional study. A questionnaire was distributed to operating room staff, including nursing staff, surgeons, and anesthetists. In addition to the information about surgical checklist, We also collected information regarding years of experience in the operating theater. Fisher's exact was used to compare proportions in each statement. Group discussion meetings with key professionals were held to jointly assess the results, propose improvement actions, and evaluate their feasibility., Results: The overall response rate was 36.2% (131/362). Nursing staff was perceived as the most supportive group in the use of surgical checklist. A 64.3% of surgeons considered that using the checklist prevented adverse events vs 84.2% and 85.7% among anesthetists and nurses, respectively; p=0.028. Junior staff showed a supportive attitude toward the use of surgical checklist, considering it as a tool that gives them confidence. We ended up with a list of improvement actions aiming at strengthening the surgical checklist reliability and compliance., Conclusions: The perception of the surgical checklist usefulness as a tool to prevent adverse events was moderate among surgeons, but well appreciated by junior staff. Nursing staff were especially critical regarding compliance and support by other professionals. To reinforce the usefulness perception of the surgical checklist it is needed to increase the involvement of all professionals, especially senior staff and surgical leaders., (Copyright © 2021 FECA. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 2010, following the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO), our hospital implemented a surgical safety programme centred around a surgical safety checklist., Aim: The aim of this study was to compare indicators of surgical site infection, antimicrobial consumption, antimicrobial resistance, costs and in-hospital mortality before (January 2006 to July 2010) and after (August 2010 to December 2014) implementation of the programme., Methods: A case-control study was carried out matching patients with surgical site infection (SSI) to surgical patients without infection to examine the impact of the intervention., Findings: Use of the surgical checklist was associated with a significant reduction in SSI. When comparing the two time periods, we also identified a reduction in infections due to micro-organisms in the ESKAPE group (from 90.7% to 73.9%, P<0.001), a reduction of SSI in patients with contaminated, infected and potentially contaminated wounds, and for those in whom perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis was discontinued in less than 48 hours. Overall, there was a reduction in antimicrobial resistance, though there was increased resistance to carbapenems for, to glycopeptides for Enterococcus faecium, and to clindamycin for Staphylococcus aureus. We also detected increased antimicrobial consumption of second- and third-generation cephalosporins and clindamycin. We observed a reduction in hospital deaths from 6.4% to 3.2% (P=0.001), but we did not observe any reduction in costs., Conclusions: Implementation of a surgical checklist was an independent predictor of SSI reduction, and was also associated with a decrease in antimicrobial resistance and reduced in-hospital mortality., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Safety checklists have improved surgical outcomes; however, much of the literature comes from general surgery., Objective: To identify the role of time-outs in neurosurgery, understand neurosurgeons' attitudes toward time-out, and highlight areas for improvement., Methods: A cross-sectional study using a 15-item survey to evaluate how time-outs were performed across 5 hospitals affiliated with a single neurosurgery training program., Results: Surveys were sent to 51 neurosurgical faculty, fellows, and residents across 5 hospitals with a 72.5% response rate. At all hospitals, surgeons, anesthesiologists, registered nurses, and circulators were involved in time-outs. Although all required time-out before incision, there was no consensus regarding the precise timing of time-out, in policy or in practice. Overall, respondents believed the existing time-out was adequate for neurosurgical procedures (H1: 17, 65.4%; H2: 19, 86.4%; H3: 14, 70.0%; H4: 20, 80.0%; and H5: 18, 78.3%). Of the respondents, 97.2% believed time-out made surgery safe, 94.6% agreed that time-outs reduce the risk of wrong-side or wrong-level neurosurgery, and 17 (45.9%) saw a role for a neurosurgery-specific safety checklist. Pragmatic challenges (n = 20, 54.1%) and individual beliefs and attitudes (n = 20, 54.1%) were common barriers to implementation of standardized time-outs., Conclusion: Multidisciplinary time-outs have become standard of care in neurosurgery. Despite proximity and overlapping personnel, there is considerable variability between hospitals in the practice of time-outs. This lack of uniformity, allowed for by flexible World Health Organization guidelines, may reflect the origins of surgical time-outs in general surgery, rather than neurosurgery, underscoring the potential for time-out optimization with neurosurgery-specific considerations., (© Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2021.)

Objective: To elucidate the therapeutic benefits of using a surgical checklist during transurethral resection for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer., Methods: A nine-item surgical checklist was established in January 2016 to assess disease risk and resection adequacy, and it was prospectively implemented into clinical practice. Patients diagnosed with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who underwent complete resection from January 2009 to August 2019 were included in this study. The presence of detrusor muscle in the transurethral resection specimen and the intravesical recurrence-free survival were compared between patients who underwent transurethral resection before and after surgical checklist implementation., Results: A total of 125 patients who underwent transurethral resection after surgical checklist implementation were reviewed and compared with 125 patients who underwent transurethral resection before surgical checklist implementation. The use of the surgical checklist led to an increase in the proportion of transurethral resection specimens containing detrusor muscle (92% vs 69.6%, P < 0.01) and a decrease in the recurrence rate (19.2% vs 49.6%, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed that transurethral resection without a surgical checklist was an independent predictive factor influencing the absence of detrusor muscle in the transurethral resection specimen (odds ratio 4.78, P < 0.01) and intravesical recurrence (hazard ratio 1.92, 95% confidence interval 1.14-3.23; P = 0.01). Kaplan-Meier plots showed that the recurrence-free survival rate was significantly lower when the surgical checklist was not used (log-rank test result P < 0.01)., Conclusions: This study shows the therapeutic benefits of surgical checklist in improving the quality of resection during transurethral resection and reducing the recurrence rate in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer., (© 2021 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Background: Suboptimal communication can lead to preventable preoperative delays. In our study, we aimed to identify factors delaying surgery in the immediate preoperative period. Our outcomes of interest were the anesthesia release to incision time (RIT) and preoperative expectations of neurosurgery and anesthesia providers. Additionally, we introduced new communication goals prior to induction, to examine the impact on preoperative efficiency., Methods: The study is a prospective cohort analysis evaluating communication in the immediate preoperative period. In 42 consecutive cranial neurosurgical cases, a questionnaire was given to neurosurgical and anesthesia providers, and their responses were recorded. Halfway through this study, a formal pre-induction checklist was implemented that included expected duration of surgery, expected blood loss, surgical positioning, and intraoperative medication requirements., Results: Comparing the cohorts before and after implementing the checklist, no difference in release to incision time was observed. However, the difference in estimated procedure time was significantly decreased after implementation of the formal pre-induction checklist. Further, there was a trend towards better agreement in estimated blood loss, although results did not achieve statistical significance. These delays all demonstrated a statistically significant decrease after the new communication goals were executed., Conclusion: While no statistically significant change in release to incision time was uncovered during our study, there was evidence that communication between teams improved after implementation of the checklist. Additionally, we observed less discrepancy in estimated case length and blood loss, suggesting focused communication goals aligned expectations of the neurosurgical and anesthesia teams., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study investigated cesarean delivery surgical site infection (SSI) rates before and after implementation of a SSI care bundle., Methods: A SSI bundle for cesareans was introduced in our hospital in April 2014 to reduce the SSI rate. The practices were divided into bundle elements that reflected preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate implementation of the SSI care bundle. Women were included if they had a gestational age of at least 23 0/7 weeks and delivered a liveborn neonate(s) between 2012 and 2015. They were then divided into 2 study groups: pre-bundle and post-bundle. The primary study outcome was SSI rate. Secondary outcomes included comorbidities, perioperative factors, and SSI classification., Results: The overall incidence of cesarean SSIs during the study time period was 1.89 (76 SSIs in 4014 cesarean deliveries). The pre-bundle mean was 2.44 and decreased to 1.1 following implementation of the SSI bundle (P = .013). This represents a 221% reduction in the SSI rate. Patient demographics and pre-existing medical conditions were similar pre- and post-bundle. Compliance with bundle elements was high., Conclusions: A significant reduction in SSI rate in cesarean deliveries was seen following implementation of an infection prevention bundle., (Copyright © 2019 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Safety checklists have been studied among various surgical patient groups, but evidence of their benefits in neurosurgery remains sparse. Since the implementation of the World Health Organization's Surgical Safety Checklist, their use has become widespread. The aim of this review was to systematically review the state of the literature on surgical safety checklists in neurosurgery. Also, in the new era of robotics and artificial intelligence, there is a need to re-evaluate patient safety procedures in neurosurgery. A systematic review was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and MEDLINE for articles published between 2008 and 2016 using MeSH (medical subject heading) terms and keywords describing postoperative complications and surgical adverse events, and some additional searches were carried out until January 2019. Twenty-six original studies or reviews were eligible for this review. They were categorized into studies with patient-related outcomes, personnel-related outcomes, or previous reviews. Checklist use in neurosurgery was found to reduce hospital-acquired infectious complications and to enhance operating room safety culture. Checklists seem to improve patient safety in neurosurgery, although the amount of evidence is still limited. Despite their shortcomings, checklists are here to stay, and new research is required to update checklists to meet the requirements of the transforming working environment of the neurosurgery operating room., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine if attending surgeon presence at the preinduction briefing is associated with a shorter time to incision., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study and survey., Setting: Tertiary academic medical center., Subjects and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of 22,857 operations by 141 attending surgeons across 12 specialties between August 3, 2016, and June 21, 2018. The independent variable was attending surgeon presence at the preinduction briefing. Linear regression models compared time from room entry to incision overall, by service line, and by surgeon. We hypothesized a shorter time to incision when the attending surgeon was present and a larger effect for cases with complex surgical equipment or positioning. A survey was administered to evaluate attending surgeons' perceptions of the briefing, with a response rate of 68% (64 of 94 attending surgeons)., Results: Cases for which the attending surgeon was present at the preinduction briefing had a statistically significant yet operationally minor reduction in mean time to incision when compared with cases when the attending surgeon was absent. After covariate adjustment, the mean time to incision was associated with an efficiency gain of 1.8 ± 0.5 minutes (mean ± SD; P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences in the subgroups of complex surgical equipment and complex positioning or in secondary analysis comparing service lines. The surgeon was the strongest confounding variable. Survey results demonstrated mild support: 55% of attending surgeons highly prioritized attending the preinduction briefing., Conclusion: Attending surgeon presence at the preinduction briefing has only a minor effect on efficiency as measured by time to incision.

Background: Recently, the use of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (ioMRI) has evolved in neurosurgery. Challenges related to ioMRI-augmented procedures are significant, since the magnetic field creates a potentially hazardous environment. Strict safety guidelines in the operating room (OR) are necessary. Checklists can minimize errors while increasing efficiency and improving workflow., Objective: To describe the Zurich checklists for safety in the ioMRI environment., Methods: We summarize the checklist protocol and the experience gained from over 300 surgical procedures performed over a 4-yr period using this new system for transcranial or transsphenoidal surgery in a 2-room high-field 3 Tesla ioMRI suite., Results: Particularities of the 2-room setting used at our institution can be summarized as (1) patient transfer from a sterile to a nonsterile environment and (2) patient transfer from a zone without to a zone with a high-strength magnetic field. Steps on the checklist have been introduced for reasons of efficient workflow, safety pertaining to the strength of the magnetic field, or sterility concerns. Each step in the checklist corresponds to a specific phase and particular actions taken during the workflow in the ioMRI suite. Most steps are relevant to any 2-room ioMRI-OR suite., Conclusion: The use of an ioMRI-checklist promotes a zero-tolerance attitude for errors, can lower complications, and can help create an environment that is both efficient and safe for the patient and the OR personnel. We highly recommend the use of a surgical checklist when applying ioMRI., (© Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2018.)

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of an eight-item surgical checklist (SC) on the recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) undergoing transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT)., Patients and Methods: A group of urologists at two tertiary referral centres, with expertise in bladder cancer, identified eight critical items that should be performed in every high-quality TURBT. An eight-item SC was prospectively implemented into clinical practice and the operative reports of TURBTs performed before and after implementation were reviewed. Results from both institutions were combined to estimate the impact of introducing the SC on oncological outcomes. Multivariable logistic and Cox hazards regression analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of the SC on the presence of detrusor muscle in the TURBT specimen and on RFS, respectively., Results: The operative reports of 266 TURBTs performed after the SC implementation were reviewed and compared to those of 281 TURBTs performed prior to the SC introduction. The SC was independently associated with a significant improvement in RFS (P = 0.02). However, the introduction of the SC was not significantly associated with the presence of detrusor muscle in the surgical specimen (P = 0.4)., Conclusion: The use of an eight-item SC during TURBT in clinical practice increases the quality of operative reports thereby potentially improving individualised risk-stratification and care resulting in lower disease recurrence rates. Therefore, the introduction of a SC can be recommended to enhance oncological outcomes by improving surgical standardisation and operative reporting., (© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist is used globally to ensure patient safety during surgery. Two years after its implementation in the University Hospital Basel's operating rooms, adherence to the protocol was evaluated., Methods: This mixed method observational study took place in the surgical department of the University Hospital of Basel, Switzerland from April to August 2017. Data collection was via individual structured interviews with selected OR team members regarding checklist adherence and on-site non-participant observations of Team Time Out and Team Sign Out sequences in the OR. Data were subjected to thematic analysis and descriptive statistics compiled., Results: Comprehensive local expert interviews indicated that individual, procedural and contextual variables influenced the application of the checklist. Facilitating factors included well-informed specialists who advocated the use of the Checklist, as well as teams focused on the checklist's intended process and on its content. In contrast, factors such as staff insecurity, a generally negative attitude towards the checklist, a lack of teamwork, and hesitance to complete the checklist, hindered its implementation.The checklist's application was evaluated in 104 on-site observations comprising of 72 Team Time Out (TTO) and 32 Team Sign Out (TSO) sections. Adherence to the protocol ranged between 96 and 100% in TTO and 22% in TSO respectively. Lack of implementation of the TSO was mainly due to the absence of one of the key OR team members, who were busy with other tasks or no longer present in the operating room., Conclusion: The study illustrates factors, which foster and hinder consistent application of the WHO surgical safety checklist namely individual, procedural and contextual. It also demonstrates that the TTO was consistently and correctly applied, while the unavailability of key OR team members at sign-out time was the most common reason for omission or incomplete use of the TSO., Competing Interests: Waived by the regional Ethics committee (EKNZ, REQ–2017–00372).Not applicable.The authors declare that they have no competing interests.Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The adoption of a surgical checklist is strongly recommended worldwide as an effective practice to improve patient safety; however, several studies have reported mixed results and a number of issues are still unresolved. The main objective of this study was to explore the impact of the first 5-year period of a surgical checklist-based intervention in a large regional health care system in Italy (4 500 000 inhabitants). We conducted a retrospective longitudinal study on 1 166 424 patients who underwent surgery in 48 public hospitals between 2006 and 2014. The adherence to the checklist was measured between 2011 and 2013 through a computerized database. The effects of the intervention were explored through multivariable logistic regression and difference-in-differences (DID) approaches, based on current administrative data sources. In-hospital and 30-days mortality, 30-days readmissions and length-of-stay (LOS) ⩾8 days were the observed outcomes. Adherence to the checklist showed marked variations across hospitals (0%-93.3%). A pre/post analysis detected statistically significant differences between surgical interventions performed in hospitals with higher adherence to the checklist (⩾75% of the surgeries) and those performed in other hospitals, as for the 30-days readmissions rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-0.98) and LOS ⩾ 8 days rate (OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.87-0.89). These findings were confirmed after risk adjustment and DID analysis. No association was observed with mortality outcomes. On the whole, our study attained mixed results. Although a protective effect of the surgical checklist use could not be proved over the first 5 years of this regional implementation experience, our research offers some methodological insights for practical use in the evaluation process of large-scale implementation projects., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interests:The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Surgical checklist was introduced by the World Health Organization to reduce the number of surgical deaths and complications. During a surgical conference on "safety in surgical practice," it was noticed that the awareness and the use of surgical checklist are poor in Nigerian hospitals. This study was aimed at determining the awareness and use of surgical checklist among the theater users in our hospital, factors militating against its implementation, and make recommendations., Methods: This is a prospective study at Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital, Ado-Ekiti; questionnaires were distributed to three groups of theater users - surgeons, anesthetists, and perioperative nurses. The responses were collated by the lead researcher, entered into Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, exported, and analyzed with SPSS., Results: Eighty-five questionnaires were distributed, 70 were returned, and 4 were discarded due to poor filling. The studied 66 comprised 40, 12, and 14 surgeons, anesthetists, and perioperative nurses, respectively. Fifty-five (83.3%) of the responders indicated awareness of the checklist but only 12 (21.8%) correctly stated that the main objective is for patients' safety and for safe surgery. Major barriers to its use include lack of training 58.2%, lack of assertiveness of staff 58.2%, and that its delays operation list 47.2%., Conclusion: The study demonstrated high level of awareness of surgical checklist in our hospital; however, this awareness is based on wrong premises as it is not reflected in the true aim of the checklist. Majority of the responders would want to be trained on the use of checklist despite the highlighted barriers., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest.

Health care is an inherently dangerous environment, and patient safety should be an explicit goal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Important components of a safety program include a nonpunitive safety culture, the implementation of patient safety practices, standardized incident reporting and adverse event analysis, regular self-assessment, and internal and external benchmarking. Implementation of a safety program requires the strong commitment of leadership and the engagement and empowerment of all employees. Oral and maxillofacial surgery can become the model dental specialty by implementing patient safety programs for office-based surgery. The programs could then be used by all dental practitioners performing oral surgery in the office., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Medicine relies on innovation to continually improve. However, innovation is potentially risky, and not all innovations are successful. Therefore, it is important to identify innovations prospectively and provide support, to make innovation as safe and effective as possible. The Macquarie Surgical Innovation Identification Tool (MSIIT) is a simple checklist designed as a practical tool for hospitals to identify planned surgical innovations. This project aims to test the usability and pilot the use of the MSIIT in a surgical setting., Methods and Analysis: The project will run in two phases at two Australian hospitals, one public and one private. Phase I will involve interviews, focus groups and a survey of hospital administrators and surgical teams to assess the usability and system requirements for the use of the MSIIT. Current practice regarding surgical innovation within participating hospitals will be mapped, and the best implementation strategy for MSIIT completion will be established. Phase II will involve trialling the MSIIT for each surgery within the trial period by various surgical personnel. Follow-up interviews, focus groups and a survey will be conducted with trial participants to collect feedback on their experience of using the MSIIT during the trial period. Comparative data on rates of surgical innovation during the trial period will also be gathered from existing hospital systems and compared to the rates identified by the MSIIT., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained. The results of this study will be presented to interested health services and other stakeholders, presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed MEDLINE-indexed journal., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

The World Health Organization (WHO) created the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist to prevent adverse events in operating rooms. The aim of this study was to analyze WHO checklist implementation in three operating rooms of public hospitals in the Brazilian Federal District. A prospective cross-sectional study was performed with pre- (Period I) and post (Period II)-checklist intervention evaluations. A total of 1141 patients and 1052 patients were studied in Periods I and II for a total of 2193 patients. Period I took place from December 2012 to March 2013, and Period II took place from April 2013 to August 2014. Regarding the pre-operatory items, most surgeries were classified as clean-contaminated in both phases, and team attire improved from 19.2% to 71.0% in Period II. Regarding checklist adherence in Period II, "Patient identification" significantly improved in the stage "Before induction of anesthesia". "Allergy verification", "Airway obstruction verification", and "Risk of blood loss assessment" had low adherence in all three hospitals. The items in the stage "Before surgical incision" showed greater than 90.0% adherence with the exception of "Anticipated critical events: Anesthesia team review" (86.7%) and "Essential imaging display" (80.0%). Low adherence was noted in "Instrument counts" and "Equipment problems" in the stage "Before patient leaves operating room". Complications and deaths were low in both periods. Despite the variability in checklist item compliance in the surveyed hospitals, WHO checklist implementation as an intervention tool showed good adherence to the majority of the items on the list. Nevertheless, motivation to use the instrument by the surgical team with the intent of improving surgical patient safety continues to be crucial., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Existing evidence suggests that communication failures are common in the operating room, and that they lead to increased complications, including infections. Use of a surgical safety checklist may prevent communication failures and reduce complications. Initial data from the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (WHO SSC) demonstrated significant reductions in both morbidity and mortality with checklist implementation. A growing body of literature points out that while the physical act of "checking the box" may not necessarily prevent all adverse events, the checklist is a scaffold on which attitudes toward teamwork and communication can be encouraged and improved. Recent evidence reinforces the fact the compliance with the checklist is critical for the effects on patient safety to be realized., (Copyright © 2015 King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Surgery is complex and technically demanding for all team members. Surgical checklists have been implemented with different degrees of success in the perioperative setting. There is a wealth of evidence that they are effective at preventing patient safety events and helping team members master the complexities of modern health care. Implementation is key to successful use of the surgical checklist in all invasive procedural settings. Key strategies for successful checklist implementation include establishing a multidisciplinary team to implement the checklist, involving surgeon leaders, pilot testing the checklist, incorporating feedback from team members to improve the process, recognizing and addressing barriers to implementation, and offering coaching and continuous feedback to team members who use the checklist. Using these strategies will give the perioperative nurse, department leaders, and surgeons the tools to implement a successful checklist., (Copyright © 2014 AORN, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Consensus-based creation of a checklist and guideline., Objective: To develop a consensus-based checklist to guide surgeon responses to intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) changes in patients with a stable spine and to develop a consensus-based best practice guideline for IONM practice in the United States., Summary of Background Data: Studies show that checklists enhance surgical team responses to crisis situations and improve patient outcomes. Currently, no widely accepted guidelines exist for the response to IONM changes in spine deformity surgery., Methods: After a literature review of risk factors and recommendations for responding to IONM changes, 4 surveys were administered to 21 experienced spine surgeons and 1 neurologist experienced in IONM. Areas of equipoise were identified and the nominal group process was used to determine items to be included in the checklist. The authors reevaluated and modified the checklist at 3 face-to-face meetings over 12 months, including a period of clinical validation using a modified Delphi process. The group was also surveyed on current IONM practices at their institutions. This information and existing IONM position statements were used to create the IONM best practice guideline., Results: Consensus was reached for the creation of 5 checklist headings containing 26 items to consider in the response to IONM changes. Consensus was reached on 5 statements for inclusion in the best practice guideline; the final guideline promotes a team approach and makes recommendations aimed at decreasing variability in neuromonitoring practices., Conclusions: The final products represent the consensus of a group of expert spine surgeons. The checklist includes the most important and high-yield items to consider when responding to IONM changes in patients with a stable spine, whereas the IONM guideline represents the group consensus on items that should be considered best practice among IONM teams with the appropriate resources., (Copyright © 2014 Scoliosis Research Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)