CheckPOINT:一个测量手术安全检查表实施保真度的简单工具。

IF 5.6 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Rachel Moyal-Smith, James C Etheridge, Nathan Turley, Shu Rong Lim, Yves Sonnay, Sarah Payne, Henriette Smid-Nanninga, Rishabh Kothari, William Berry, Joaquim Havens, Mary E Brindle
{"title":"CheckPOINT:一个测量手术安全检查表实施保真度的简单工具。","authors":"Rachel Moyal-Smith, James C Etheridge, Nathan Turley, Shu Rong Lim, Yves Sonnay, Sarah Payne, Henriette Smid-Nanninga, Rishabh Kothari, William Berry, Joaquim Havens, Mary E Brindle","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a communication tool that improves teamwork and patient outcomes. SSC effectiveness is dependent on implementation fidelity. Administrative audits fail to capture most aspects of SSC implementation fidelity (ie, team communication and engagement). Existing research tools assess behaviours during checklist performance, but were not designed for routine quality assurance and improvement. We aimed to create a simple tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity, and to test its reliability using video simulations, and usability in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Checklist Performance Observation for Improvement (CheckPOINT) tool underwent two rounds of face validity testing with surgical safety experts, clinicians and quality improvement specialists. Four categories were developed: checklist adherence, communication effectiveness, attitude and engagement. We created a 90 min training programme, and four trained raters independently scored 37 video simulations using the tool. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess inter-rater reliability (ICC>0.75 indicating excellent reliability). We then trained two observers, who tested the tool in the operating room. We interviewed the observers to determine tool usability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CheckPOINT tool had excellent inter-rater reliability across SSC phases. The ICC was 0.83 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98) for the sign-in, 0.77 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.92) for the time-out and 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.99) for the sign-out. During field testing, observers reported CheckPOINT was easy to use. In 98 operating room observations, the total median (IQR) score was 25 (23-28), checklist adherence was 7 (6-7), communication effectiveness was 6 (6-7), attitude was 6 (6-7) and engagement was 6 (5-7).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CheckPOINT is a simple and reliable tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity and identify areas of focus for improvement efforts. Although CheckPOINT would benefit from further testing, it offers a low-resource alternative to existing research tools and captures elements of adherence and team behaviours.</p>","PeriodicalId":9077,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Quality & Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CheckPOINT: a simple tool to measure Surgical Safety Checklist implementation fidelity.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Moyal-Smith, James C Etheridge, Nathan Turley, Shu Rong Lim, Yves Sonnay, Sarah Payne, Henriette Smid-Nanninga, Rishabh Kothari, William Berry, Joaquim Havens, Mary E Brindle\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a communication tool that improves teamwork and patient outcomes. SSC effectiveness is dependent on implementation fidelity. Administrative audits fail to capture most aspects of SSC implementation fidelity (ie, team communication and engagement). Existing research tools assess behaviours during checklist performance, but were not designed for routine quality assurance and improvement. We aimed to create a simple tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity, and to test its reliability using video simulations, and usability in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Checklist Performance Observation for Improvement (CheckPOINT) tool underwent two rounds of face validity testing with surgical safety experts, clinicians and quality improvement specialists. Four categories were developed: checklist adherence, communication effectiveness, attitude and engagement. We created a 90 min training programme, and four trained raters independently scored 37 video simulations using the tool. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess inter-rater reliability (ICC>0.75 indicating excellent reliability). We then trained two observers, who tested the tool in the operating room. We interviewed the observers to determine tool usability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CheckPOINT tool had excellent inter-rater reliability across SSC phases. The ICC was 0.83 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98) for the sign-in, 0.77 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.92) for the time-out and 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.99) for the sign-out. During field testing, observers reported CheckPOINT was easy to use. In 98 operating room observations, the total median (IQR) score was 25 (23-28), checklist adherence was 7 (6-7), communication effectiveness was 6 (6-7), attitude was 6 (6-7) and engagement was 6 (5-7).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CheckPOINT is a simple and reliable tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity and identify areas of focus for improvement efforts. Although CheckPOINT would benefit from further testing, it offers a low-resource alternative to existing research tools and captures elements of adherence and team behaviours.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Quality & Safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Quality & Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016030\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Quality & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016030","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:世界卫生组织手术安全检查表(SSC)是一种沟通工具,可改善团队合作和患者结果。SSC的有效性取决于实施的保真度。行政审计未能涵盖SSC实施忠诚度的大部分方面(即团队沟通和参与)。现有的研究工具评估检查表执行过程中的行为,但不是为日常质量保证和改进而设计的。我们旨在创建一个简单的工具来评估SSC实施的保真度,并使用视频模拟测试其可靠性,以及在临床实践中的可用性。方法:与手术安全专家、临床医生和质量改进专家一起,对检查表绩效观察改进(CheckPOINT)工具进行两轮面部有效性测试。制定了四个类别:遵守检查表、沟通有效性、态度和参与度。我们创建了一个90分钟的培训计划,四名经过培训的评分员使用该工具独立完成了37次视频模拟。我们计算了组内相关系数(ICC)来评估评分者之间的可靠性(ICC>0.75表示可靠性良好)。然后,我们培训了两名观察员,他们在手术室测试了该工具。我们采访了观察者以确定工具的可用性。结果:CheckPOINT工具在SSC各阶段具有良好的评分者间可靠性。登录的ICC为0.83(95%CI 0.67至0.98),超时的ICC为0.77(95%CI 0.63至0.92),注销的ICC为0.7 9(95%CI 0.59至0.99)。在现场测试期间,观察员报告CheckPOINT易于使用。在98例手术室观察中,总中位(IQR)得分为25(23-28),检查表依从性为7(6-7),沟通有效性为6(6-7)、态度为6(6-7),参与度为6(5-7)。结论:CheckPOINT是一种简单可靠的工具,可用于评估SSC实施的保真度并确定改进工作的重点领域。尽管CheckPOINT将从进一步的测试中受益,但它为现有的研究工具提供了一种低资源的替代方案,并捕捉了遵守和团队行为的要素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
CheckPOINT: a simple tool to measure Surgical Safety Checklist implementation fidelity.

Introduction: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a communication tool that improves teamwork and patient outcomes. SSC effectiveness is dependent on implementation fidelity. Administrative audits fail to capture most aspects of SSC implementation fidelity (ie, team communication and engagement). Existing research tools assess behaviours during checklist performance, but were not designed for routine quality assurance and improvement. We aimed to create a simple tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity, and to test its reliability using video simulations, and usability in clinical practice.

Methods: The Checklist Performance Observation for Improvement (CheckPOINT) tool underwent two rounds of face validity testing with surgical safety experts, clinicians and quality improvement specialists. Four categories were developed: checklist adherence, communication effectiveness, attitude and engagement. We created a 90 min training programme, and four trained raters independently scored 37 video simulations using the tool. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess inter-rater reliability (ICC>0.75 indicating excellent reliability). We then trained two observers, who tested the tool in the operating room. We interviewed the observers to determine tool usability.

Results: The CheckPOINT tool had excellent inter-rater reliability across SSC phases. The ICC was 0.83 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98) for the sign-in, 0.77 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.92) for the time-out and 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.99) for the sign-out. During field testing, observers reported CheckPOINT was easy to use. In 98 operating room observations, the total median (IQR) score was 25 (23-28), checklist adherence was 7 (6-7), communication effectiveness was 6 (6-7), attitude was 6 (6-7) and engagement was 6 (5-7).

Conclusions: CheckPOINT is a simple and reliable tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity and identify areas of focus for improvement efforts. Although CheckPOINT would benefit from further testing, it offers a low-resource alternative to existing research tools and captures elements of adherence and team behaviours.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Quality & Safety
BMJ Quality & Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
104
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Quality & Safety (previously Quality & Safety in Health Care) is an international peer review publication providing research, opinions, debates and reviews for academics, clinicians and healthcare managers focused on the quality and safety of health care and the science of improvement. The journal receives approximately 1000 manuscripts a year and has an acceptance rate for original research of 12%. Time from submission to first decision averages 22 days and accepted articles are typically published online within 20 days. Its current impact factor is 3.281.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信