Ameliyathane ve cerrahi servis çalışanlarının DSÖ Güvenli Cerrahi Kontrol Listesine ilişkin düşünceleri

Year 2020, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 36 - 42, 20.04.2020

Ebru Önler Tülin Yıldız Makbule Cavidan Arar Fatih Horozoğlu Fatma Nair

https://doi.org/10.37696/nkmj.547392

Abstract

Amaç: Bu
araştırmanın amacı, ameliyathane ve cerrahi servis çalışanlarının DSÖ Güvenli
Cerrahi Kontrol Listesine ilişkin düşüncelerini belirlemektir.

Materyal ve Metot: Bu
çalışma tanımlayıcı bir anket çalışmasıdır. Anket formu cinsiyet, yaş, meslek,
çalışma deneyimi gibi soruları içermektedir. Çalışanlar, 5’li likert ölçek ile,
Güvenli Cerrahi Kontrol Listesindeki her bir maddenin önemini değerlendirmişler
ve açık uçlu sorular aracılığıyla listeye ilişkin yorumlarda bulunmuşlardır. Araştırmacılar
verileri, Aralık 2017- Ocak 2018 tarihlerinde hastaneyi ziyaret ederek
toplamışlardır. Örneklem grubunu, Türkiye’nin batısında yer alan bir üniversite
hastanesinde görev yapan 27 cerrah, 34 anestezist, 19 ameliyathane hemşiresi ve
38 cerrahi servis hemşiresi oluşturmuştur. Elde edilen veriler SPSS 18.0 paket
programı ile yüzdelik, sıklık, ortalama ve standart sapma kullanılarak
değerlendirilmiştir. Bu araştırma X Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Girişimsel
Olmayan Araştırmalar Etik Kurulu tarafından onaylanmıştır. (No: 2017/128/12/16)

Bulgular: Örneklem
grubunun %61’i kadın, %47’si 30 yaşın altında, % 83.1’i 1 yıldan fazla mesleki
deneyime sahiptir. Maddelerin önem derecelerinin ortalamaları 4.25 ile 4.79
arasında değişmektedir. ’Hastanın kimlik bilgilerinin, ameliyatının ve
bölgesinin doğrulanması’’ (4.79±0.50) ve ‘’hasta aç mı’’ (4.76±0.53) en önemli
görülen maddeler olurken, ‘’Kan şekeri kontrolü gerekli mi?’’ (4.25±1.08)  ve ‘’Ekipteki kişiler kendilerini ad, soyad ve görevleri
ile tanıttı mı?’’ (4.32±0.53) maddelerdi
ise en önemsiz algılanan maddelerdi. Çalışanlar, ‘’Hastanın bilinen bir
alerjisi var mı?  ve ‘’Derin ven trombozu
ve antibiyotik profilaksisi sorgulandı mı?’’ maddelerinin listenin ‘’klinikten
ayrılmadan önce’’ kısmında kontrol edilmesi önerdi. Ayrıca çalışanlar, lokal ve
acil cerrahi girişimler için daha kısa bir kontrol listesinin oluşturulmasını
ve kontrol listesi tamamlamadan ameliyatın başlamasını önleyecek chatbot’lar
gibi yapay zeka ürünlerinin kullanılmasını önerdi.

Sonuç: Çalışanlar
Güvenli Cerrahi Kontrol Listesinde yer alan tüm maddelerin önemli olduğunu
düşünmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:  hasta güvenliği, ameliyathane, cerrahi 

Keywords

hasta güvenliği, ameliyathane, cerrahi

Opinions of Operating Room and Surgical Ward Staff toward WHO Surgical Safety Checklist

Abstract

Objective: This research is aimed at evaluating operating room and surgical ward
staff’s opinions regarding the WHO surgical safety checklist.

Design: This
was a descriptive, questionnaire study.

Material and Method: The
questionnaire includes questions about gender, age, job role, and years of
experience. Every item on the checklist was evaluated, and responders were
permitted to provide freehand comments on the subject. The researchers visited
a hospital and collected data from December 2017 - January 2018. The sample
population includes 27 surgeons, 34 anaesthetists, and 19 operating room and 38
surgical ward nurses at a university hospital in western Turkey. The collected
data were analysed using SPSS 18.0 with frequencies, percentages, mean, and
standard deviation. This study was approved by the Ethical Committee of X
University Medical Faculty, No: 2017/128/12/16.

Results: Of the
sample population 61% were women, 47% were under 30 years old, and 83.1% had
over 1 year of job experience. The mean score of item importance varied from
4.25 to 4.79. The items “patient's identity, procedure, operation site
verification” (4.79±0.50) and “preoperative fasting” (4.76±0.53) had the
highest scores. “Blood glucose control” (4.25±1.08) and “team members
introduced” (4.32±0.53) had the lowest scores. It
was suggested that “allergy” and “prophylaxis of antibiotic and deep vein
thrombosis” be transferred to the “before the patients leave the ward” section.
It was also suggested to add a compact checklist for local and emergency
surgeries and employ artificial intelligence, like chatbots, to prevent surgery
from starting before the checklist is completed.

Conclusion: All
checklist items were considered necessary.

Keywords: patient
safety, operating room, surgery

Keywords

patient safety, operating room, surgery

References

• Reference1.Mayer EK, Sevdalis N, Rout S, Caris J, Russ S, Mansell J et al. Surgical Checklist Implementation Project: The Impact of Variable WHO Checklist Compliance on Risk-adjusted Clinical Outcomes After National Implementation A Longitudinal Study. Annals of surgery. 2016; 263(1): 58-63. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001185
• Reference2.Patel J, Ahmed K, Guru KA, Khan F, Marsh H, Khan MS et al. An overview of the use and implementation of checklists in surgical specialities–A systematic review. International Journal of Surgery. 2014; 12(12): 1317-1323. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.10.031
• Reference3. Kwok AC, Funk LM, Baltaga R, Lipsitz SR, Merry AF, Dziekan G et al. Implementation of the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist, including introduction of pulse oximetry, in a resource-limited setting. Annals of surgery. 2013; 257(4): 633-639. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182777fa4
• Reference4.Borchard A, Schwappach DL, Barbir A, & Bezzola P. A systematic review of the effectiveness, compliance, and critical factors for implementation of safety checklists in surgery. Annals of surgery.2012; 256(6): 925-933.DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182682f27
• Reference5.Haugen AS, Søfteland E, Almeland SK, Sevdalis N, Vonen B, Eide GE et al. Effect of the World Health Organization checklist on patient outcomes: a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Annals of surgery. 2015; 261(5): 821-828.DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000716
• Reference6. Pugel AE, Simianu VV, Flum DR, & Dellinger EP. Use of the surgical safety checklist to improve communication and reduce complications. Journal of infection and public health. 2015; 8(3): 219-225.DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2015.01.001
• Reference7. Levy SM, Senter CE, Hawkins RB, Zhao JY, Doody K, Kao LS et al. Implementing A Surgical Checklist: More Than Checking A Box. Surgery. 2012; 152 (3): 331-336. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2012.05.034
• Reference8.Fourcade A, Blache JL, Grenier C, Bourgain JL, & Minvielle E. Barriers to staff adoption of a surgical safety checklist. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2011; bmjqs-2011: 1-7. DOI:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000094
• Reference9. Rydenfält C, Ek Å, & Larsson PA. Republished: Safety checklist compliance and a false sense of safety: new directions for research. Postgraduate Medical Journal. 2014; 90(1066): 446-449.DOI: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2013-002168rep
• Reference10. Rydenfält C, Johansson G, Odenrick P, Åkerman K, Larsson PA. Compliance with the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist: deviations and possible improvements. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2013; 25(2):182-7. DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzt004
• Reference11. Haugen AS, Murugesh S, Haaverstad R, Eide GE, & Søfteland E. A survey of surgical team members’ perceptions of near misses and attitudes towards Time Out protocols.BMC surgery.2013; 13(1): 46.DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-13-46
• Reference12.Helmiö P, Takala A, Aaltonen L M, Blomgren K. WHO Surgical Safety Checklist in Otorhinolaryngology-head and Neck Surgery: Specialty-Related Aspects of check items, Acta Oto-Laryngologica. 2012; 132: 1334-1341.DOI: 10.3109/00016489.2012.700121
• Reference13.Birnbach DJ, Rosen LF, Fitzpatrick M, Paige JT, & Arheart KL. Introductions During Time-outs: Do Surgical Team Members Know One Another's Names?. Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety. 2017; 43(6): 284-288. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2017.03.001
• Reference14. Nilsson L, Lindberget O, Gupta A, & Vegfors M. Implementing a pre-operative checklist to increase patient safety: a 1‐year follow‐up of personnel attitudes. Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2010; 54(2): 176-182. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399- 6576.2009.02109.x
• Reference15.Biskup N, Workman AD, Kutzner E, Adetayo OA, & Gupta SC. Perioperative safety in plastic surgery: is the World Health Organization checklist useful in a broad practice?. Annals of plastic surgery. 2016; 76(5): 550-555. DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000427
• Reference16. Russ SJ, Sevdalis N, Moorthy K, Mayer EK, Rout S, Caris J et al. A qualitative evaluation of the barriers and facilitators toward implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist across hospitals in England: lessons from the “Surgical Checklist Implementation Project”. Annals of surgery. 2015; 261(1): 81-91.DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000793
• Reference17.Vats A, Vincent CA, Nagpal K, Davies RW, Darzi A, & Moorthy K. Practical challenges of introducing WHO surgical checklist: UK pilot experience. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online). 2010; 340: 1-5. DOI:10.1136/bmj.b5433
• Reference18.D'Alfonso S, Santesteban-Echarri O, Rice S, Wadley G, Lederman R, Miles C et al. Artificial intelligence-assisted online social therapy for youth mental health. Frontiers in psychology. 2017; 8: 796. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00796
• Reference19.Crutzen R, Peters GJY, Portugal SD, Fisser EM, & Grolleman JJ. An artificially intelligent chat agent that answers adolescents' questions related to sex, drugs, and alcohol: an exploratory study. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2011; 48(5): 514-519. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.09.002
• Reference20.Pauletto S, Balentine B, Pidcock C, Jones K, Bottaci L, Aretoulaki M et al. Exploring expressivity and emotion with artificial voice and speech technologies. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology. 2013; 38(3): 115-125.DOI: 10.3109/14015439.2013.810303
• Reference21. O’Connor P, Ryan S, & Keogh I. A comparison of the teamwork attitudes and knowledge of Irish surgeons and US Naval aviators. The surgeon. 2012; 10(5): 278-282. DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2011.09.001
• Reference22. O’Connor P, Reddin C, O’Sullivan M, O’Duffy F, & Keogh I. Surgical checklists: the human factor. Patient safety in surgery.2013; 7(1): 14.DOI: 10.1186/1754-9493-7-14