Clinical risk management in eye outpatient surgery: a new surgical safety checklist for cataract surgery and intravitreal anti-VEGF injection

[Prospective Cohort Study of In-Hospital Patients Undergoing Ophthalmic Surgery for the Validation of ClassIntra: Classification of Intraoperative Adverse Events]

BACKGROUND

To the best of our knowledge, there is no validated classification to assess intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) in ophthalmic surgery. ClassIntra is a newly developed classification for surgery- and anaesthesia-related iAEs that has been recently validated in various surgical disciplines, but not in ophthalmic surgery. We aim to assess the validity and practicability of ClassIntra in patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of in-hospital patients undergoing any type of ophthalmic surgery was included in this single-centre prospective cohort study. iAEs were classified using ClassIntra, consisting of 5 severity grades according to the symptoms of the patient and the required treatment. All patients were followed for two weeks to record all postoperative adverse events according to Clavien-Dindo. The primary endpoint was the risk-adjusted association between the most severe iAE and the weighted sum of all postoperative adverse events within the two-week follow-up using the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). In addition, ophthalmologists and anaesthesiologists were asked to complete an online survey assessing the severity of iAEs for 10 fictitious clinical case scenarios. Reliability was assessed by comparing the clinicians' ratings to the prespecified benchmark rating of the study team.

RESULTS

In this study, 100 in-hospital patients with an average age of 64 years (SD 15) were included. The majority of all patients were ASA II (n = 53, 53%) or III (n = 42, 42%). Thirty-two iAEs were recorded in 22 patients (17 grade I, 12 grade II, 3 grade III). Ninety-four postoperative adverse events occurred in 50 patients (44 grade I, 36 grade II, 14 grade IIIa). We found a mean difference in CCI of 2,1 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 2,5 to 6,8) per one unit increase in severity grades of ClassIntra. Fifty ophthalmologists and anaesthesiologists completed the online survey (response rate 54%). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0,79 (95% CI 0,64 to 0,94).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of ClassIntra during daily routine in ophthalmic surgery showed the usefulness and practicability of this classification for the standardised assessment of intraoperative adverse events. Although construct validity could not be demonstrated, the good reliability in the survey's rating underlines the criterion validity of this newly developed classification in ophthalmic surgery.

Clinical risk management - a 3-year experience of team timeout in 18 081 ophthalmic patients

PURPOSE

Clinical risk management aims to identify, analyse and avoid errors and risks systematically to improve patient's safety. Preoperative checklists to prevent mistakes have gained importance in the last few years. A so-called team timeout checklist was introduced in October 2011 at the Department of Ophthalmology, Hietzing Hospital, Vienna. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the benefits and demonstrate the value of team timeout.

METHODS

After the team timeout had been in use for 6 months, all near misses that occurred over a period of 34 months were assigned to the following groups: wrong side, wrong lens, wrong patient and miscellaneous.

RESULTS

Eighteen thousand and eighty-one surgeries were performed in the specified period; 53 cases of 'wrong side' and 52 cases of 'wrong intraocular lens' were noted. Ninety-six near misses concerned the patients' data and 38 concerned documentation. A reduction of near misses was noted after an adaptation phase of 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Team timeout proved valuable, as it improved the patients' safety with minimum effort. Errors may occur despite several preoperative controls and can be detected by performing team timeout.

A realist analysis of hospital patient safety in Wales: applied learning for alternative contexts from a multisite case study

Background

Hospital patient safety is a major social problem. In the UK, policy responses focus on the introduction of improvement programmes that seek to implement evidence-based clinical practices using the Model for Improvement, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Empirical evidence that the outcomes of such programmes vary across hospitals demonstrates that the context of their implementation matters. However, the relationships between features of context and the implementation of safety programmes are both undertheorised and poorly understood in empirical terms.

Objectives

This study is designed to address gaps in conceptual, methodological and empirical knowledge about the influence of context on the local implementation of patient safety programmes.

Design

We used concepts from critical realism and institutional analysis to conduct a qualitative comparative-intensive case study involving 21 hospitals across all seven Welsh health boards. We focused on the local implementation of three focal interventions from the 1000 Lives+patient safety programme: Improving Leadership for Quality Improvement, Reducing Surgical Complications and Reducing Health-care Associated Infection. Our main sources of data were 160 semistructured interviews, observation and 1700 health policy and organisational documents. These data were analysed using the realist approaches of abstraction, abduction and retroduction.

Setting

Welsh Government and NHS Wales.

Participants

Interviews were conducted with 160 participants including government policy leads, health managers and professionals, partner agencies with strategic oversight of patient safety, advocacy groups and academics with expertise in patient safety.

Main outcome measures

Identification of the contextual factors pertinent to the local implementation of the 1000 Lives+patient safety programme in Welsh NHS hospitals.

Results

An innovative conceptual framework harnessing realist social theory and institutional theory was produced to address challenges identified within previous applications of realist inquiry in patient safety research. This involved the development and use of an explanatory intervention–context–mechanism–agency–outcome (I-CMAO) configuration to illustrate the processes behind implementation of a change programme. Our findings, illustrated by multiple nested I-CMAO configurations, show how local implementation of patient safety interventions are impacted and modified by particular aspects of context: specifically, isomorphism, by which an intervention becomes adapted to the environment in which it is implemented; institutional logics, the beliefs and values underpinning the intervention and its source, and their perceived legitimacy among different groups of health-care professionals; and the relational structure and power dynamics of the functional group, that is, those tasked with implementing the initiative. This dynamic interplay shapes and guides actions leading to the normalisation or the rejection of the patient safety programme.

Conclusions

Heightened awareness of the influence of context on the local implementation of patient safety programmes is required to inform the design of such interventions and to ensure their effective implementation and operationalisation in the day-to-day practice of health-care teams. Future work is required to elaborate our conceptual model and findings in similar settings where different interventions are introduced, and in different settings where similar innovations are implemented.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Implementation of the WHO "Safe Surgery Saves Lives" checklist in a podiatric surgery unit in Spain: a single-center retrospective observational study

Background

The Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a tool developed by the World Health Alliance for Patient Safety, to assist health professionals in improving patient safety during surgery. Numerous specialties have incorporated this into their clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to adapt and implement this tool within the field of podiatric surgery and to evaluate its impact upon safety standards and post-surgical complications.

Methods

An analytical, observational, longitudinal study has been performed retrospectively. The implementation of the Surgical Safety Checklist in podiatric surgery took place over a 10-month period. The sample is made up from the medical histories of patients who were operated on (n = 134) in the University of Seville’s podiatric clinic. The sample was divided into three groups: those prior to the implementation process (65 subjects), those after the implementation process: without the SSC (35 subjects) and those with the SSC (34 subjects). The safety standards included in the tool were analysed in conjunction with the results and post-operative complications.

Results

An improvement was seen in compliance with the Prophylaxis Protocol and the correct completion of the Informed Consent (p = 0.00), as well as a statistically significant relationship between the correct use of antibiotic prophylaxis and the use of the Surgical Safety Checklist (p = 0.049). The results demonstrate a reduction in the number of post-operative days (p = 0.012). No cases of surgery being performed in the wrong place were found in this study.

Conclusions

The Surgical Safety Checklist allows us to improve compliance with the safety protocols recommended by the scientific community, and consequently to reduce the incidence of complications related to surgery and to improve patient safety during elective podiatric surgery.