Search

Background The Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) published by the WHO in 2009 is used as standard in surgery worldwide to reduce perioperative patient mortality. However, compliance with the SSC and quality of its application are often not satisfactory. Internal audits and feedbacks seem promising for improving SSC application. Objective The purpose of this study is to investigate whether an intervention consisting of peer observation and immediate peer feedback can be implemented with high fidelity and acceptance. Method Data were obtained from a national pilot programme that was initiated in Switzerland in 2018 to measure and improve compliance with the SSC using peer audit and feedback. A total of 11 hospitals with 14 sites implemented the full intervention. Each hospital formed an interprofessional project team that should perform at least 30 observations with feedback on SSC application documented in an observation tool developed specifically for this programme. Since the SSCs of the study hospitals differ greatly regarding checklist items, for each of the three SSC sections standard items were defined: four at Sign In, five at Team Time Out and two at Sign Out. Frequency analyses were performed for initiation characteristics, SSC application at item level, feedback characteristics and programme evaluation. Results The 11 hospitals documented 715 valid observations, and feedback on SSC application was provided for 79% of the observations. In 61%, all team members stopped their work for the SSC application, and in 71%, the items were read off from the checklist (instead of recalled from memory). On average, 86% of the standard items were read out by the checklist coordinator, whilst the two items at Sign Out were read out only in 60% and 74%. Additional visual checks with another source (e.g. patient wristband) took place in only 41%, and verbal confirmation of the items (by someone else other than the checklist coordinator) was obtained on an average of 76% across all three checklist sections. The surgical teams reacted positively in 64% to the peer feedback. Conclusion Both implementation fidelity and acceptability of the intervention were high—the present intervention seems suitable for regular monitoring of the quality of SSC application with internal resources. Peer observation facilitated identifying weaknesses regarding the SSC process and application at item level. Across all hospitals, the Sign Out section in general, visual control for item checks and lack of work interruption of all team members during SSC application showed up as the main areas of improvement.

This study presents the development of a generic workshop appraisal scale (WASC) for the evaluation of organizational health interventions. Based on the session evaluation questionnaire (SEQ) by Stiles (1980), we developed a short, generic 10-item scale with pairs of adjectives, covering five facets: comprehensibility, relevance, novelty, activation, and valence. Our study is based on N = 499 employees from four organizations who participated in 41 workshops and filled out an evaluation questionnaire on-site. The questionnaire contained the newly developed WASC, as well as items capturing satisfaction with the developed output and outcome expectancies. Results from confirmative factor analysis confirmed the hypothesized five-factor structure of the WASC. The factor structure was found to be nearly invariant across the four organizations, a result that needs to be replicated in larger samples. Analysis of intra-class correlations indicated that 25% of the variance in workshop appraisal can be explained at workshop level. Hereby, perceived relevance and novelty exhibited lower amounts of shared variance, indicating that corresponding workshop appraisals are influenced more by individual factors and less by group dynamics. Furthermore, results from mediation analysis revealed that participants’ workshop appraisals were significantly related to their outcome expectancies, and that this relationship was mediated by output satisfaction. Again, the facets showed differential effects: Relevance and comprehensibility seem to contribute most to the total effect on outcome expectancy, followed by activation, whereas valence and especially novelty play a minor role. Taken together, participants’ workshop appraisals – together with output satisfaction and outcome expectancy – may be helpful for monitoring the implementation process and allow for corrective action if necessary.

OBJECTIVES In 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist, and 3 years later, the Swiss Patient Safety Foundation adapted it for Switzerland. Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews showed ambiguous results on the effectiveness of surgical checklists. Most of them assume that the study checklists are almost identical, but in fact they are quite heterogeneous due to adaptations to local settings. This study aims to investigate the extent to which the checklists currently used in Switzerland differ and to discuss the consequences of local adaptations. METHODS For the analysis, 24 checklists used in 18 Swiss hospitals are analyzed. First, general checklist characteristics are examined. Second, the checklist items are compared with the checklist items of the WHO and the Swiss Patient Safety Foundation. RESULTS The checklists contain a median of 34.5 items (range, 15-76). Compared with the checklists of WHO and Patient Safety Switzerland, which contain 12 and 21 process checks and 10 and 9 conversation prompts, respectively, the study checklists contain a median of 15.5 process checks (range, 3-25) and a median of 4 conversation prompts (range, 0-10). CONCLUSIONS There are major differences between the study checklists and the reference checklists that raise doubts about the comparability of checklists. More resources must be invested in proper checklist adaptions and better guidance on how to adapt safety tools such as the surgical safety checklist needed to local conditions. In any case, details of the checklists used need to be clearly described in studies on checklist effectiveness.

BACKGROUND To protect patients from potential hazards of hospitalization, health care professionals need an adequate situational awareness. The Room of Horrors is a simulation-based method to train situational awareness that is little used in Switzerland. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to evaluate (1) the performance of health care staff in identifying patient safety hazards, (2) the participants' subjective experiences, and (3) the group interactions in Rooms of Horrors. METHODS The study was conducted in 13 Swiss hospitals that implemented a Room of Horrors. Health care professionals participated as individuals or in groups and were asked to identify as many errors as possible within a certain time and to complete an evaluation questionnaire. Observations of group interactions were carried out in 8 hospitals. t Tests and χ2 tests were used to examine differences in performance between participants solving the task alone versus in groups. RESULTS Data of 959 health care professionals were included in the analysis. Single participants identified on average 4.7 of the 10 errors and additional 10 errors and hazards that were not part of the official scenario. However, they also overestimated their performance, with 58% feeling the errors to be easy to find. Group observations indicated that participants rarely reflected on possible consequences of the hazards for the patient or their daily work. Participants feedback to the method was very positive. CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that the Room of Horrors is a popular and effective method to raise situational awareness for patient safety issues among health care staff. More attention should be given to debriefing after the experience and to benefits of interprofessional trainings.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate whether intervention participants’ process appraisals relate to change in well-being and lean outcomes of entire teams. For this purpose, the study focussed on two main characteristics of a lean implementation process – workshop quality and outcome expectancy – and their interaction with the participation rate, and examined their association with leaner work processes and affective well-being in nursing teams.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from a lean implementation project within 29 nursing wards of a university hospital. Employee surveys covering lean work processes and affective well-being at work were conducted before the implementation of four-day lean workshops in each nursing ward and six months after. The participating employee representatives evaluated the workshop quality and outcome expectancy of the workshops.FindingsMultilevel analyses indicated that workshop quality did not relate to leaner work processes, but was associated with enhanced affective well-being after six months. By contrast, outcome expectancy was associated with leaner work processes, but did not relate to well-being. No moderation effects with participation rate were found.Practical implicationsThe study shows the importance of monitoring process indicators in the early stages of implementation and optimising workshop contents and formats accordingly to ensure positive outcomes for entire teams.Originality/valueThe present study considers intervention participants’ process appraisals of workshop quality and outcome expectancy as good indicators of future change in lean work processes and the well-being of entire teams.

To facilitate evaluation of complex, organisational health interventions (OHIs), this paper aims at developing a context, process, and outcome (CPO) evaluation model. It builds on previous model developments in the field and advances them by clearly defining and relating generic evaluation categories for OHIs. Context is defined as the underlying frame that influences and is influenced by an OHI. It is further differentiated into the omnibus and discrete contexts. Process is differentiated into the implementation process, as the time-limited enactment of the original intervention plan, and the change process of individual and collective dynamics triggered by the implementation process. These processes lead to proximate, intermediate, and distal outcomes, as all results of the change process that are meaningful for various stakeholders. Research questions that might guide the evaluation of an OHI according to the CPO categories and a list of concrete themes/indicators and methods/sources applied within the evaluation of an OHI project at a hospital in Switzerland illustrate the model’s applicability in structuring evaluations of complex OHIs. In conclusion, the model supplies a common language and a shared mental model for improving communication between researchers and company members and will improve the comparability and aggregation of evaluation study results.

This field study evaluates the process and outcome of an organizational-level stress management intervention (SMI) in eight companies, taking into account the lessons learned from previous evaluation research. It utilizes the RE-AIM evaluation framework to capture the Reach and Adoption of the intervention in the companies, the appraisal of the Implementation process and the project's Effectiveness and Maintenance with a range of qualitative and quantitative methods. It applies an adapted research design in the context of a field study involving entire organizations, retrospectively assigning study participants to comparison groups. The results of a longitudinal analysis (n = 1400) showed that the SMI had a positive impact on the participants' job demands and resources, when controlled for baseline levels. Qualitative data analysis revealed that the companies had built capacities for ongoing health promotion and showed what issues must be borne in mind when implementing such projects. The study also showed that participation in such interventions alone does not suffice to achieve the desired impact, but that the individual participants' appraisal of the intervention and the collective involvement of the teams must be further researched to fully understand how change occurs.

This study investigates the relationship between outcome expectancy for an individual stress management course and the total perceived impact of a comprehensive stress management intervention (SMI). It is based on data from three different measurement points from a longitudinal SMI in Switzerland. Individual and organizational outcome expectancies for stress management courses were captured with two newly developed items (SMI outcome expectancy) immediately after course completion. Perceived individual and organizational impacts of the overall intervention captured with two items of a retrospective impact assessment scale (perceived SMI impact) at the two year follow up survey were used as the outcome measurement. Baseline individual and organizational change commitments (as rated by participants) were included in the analyses as possible moderators. Regression analyses show that individual and organizational outcome expectancies in respect of stress management courses can to some extent predict the perceived impact of the intervention as a whole. At the individual level an intervention will be perceived as most successful when participants already have a high individual change commitment and develop high outcome expectancies during stress management courses.