Literature DB >> 30896592

Prospective Investigation of the Operating Room Time-Out Process.

Robert E Freundlich1,2, Catherine M Bulka3, Jonathan P Wanderer1,2, Brian S Rothman1,2, Warren S Sandberg1,2,4, Jesse M Ehrenfeld1,2,4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the surgical pause or time-out is a required part of most hospitals' standard operating procedures, little is known about the quality of execution of the time-out in routine clinical practice. An interactive electronic time-out was implemented to increase surgical team compliance with the time-out procedure and to improve communication among team members in the operating room. We sought to identify nonroutine events that occur during the time-out procedure in the operating room, including distractions and interruptions, deviations from protocol, and the problem-solving strategies used by operating room team members to mitigate them.
METHODS: Direct observations of surgical time-outs were performed on 166 nonemergent surgeries in 2016. For each time-out, the observers recorded compliance with each step, any nonroutine events that may have occurred, and whether any operating room team members were distracted.
RESULTS: The time-out procedure was performed before the first incision in 100% of cases. An announcement was made to indicate the start of the time-out procedure in 163 of 166 observed surgeries. Most observed time-outs were completed in <1 minute. Most time-outs were completed without interruption (92.8%). The most common reason for an interruption was to verify patient information. Ten time-out procedures were stopped due to a safety concern. At least 1 member of the operating room team was actively distracted in 10.2% of the time-out procedures observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with preincision time-outs is high at our institution, and nonroutine events are a rare occurrence. It is common for ≥1 member of the operating room team to be actively distracted during time-out procedures, even though most time-outs are completed in under 1 minute. Despite distractions, there were no wrong-site or wrong-person surgeries reported at our hospital during the study period. We conclude that the simple act of performing a preprocedure checklist may be completed quickly, but that distractions are common.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 30896592      PMCID: PMC6813865          DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004126

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  16 in total

1.  SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): Revised Publication Guidelines from a Detailed Consensus Process.

Authors:  Greg Ogrinc; Louise Davies; Daisy Goodman; Paul Batalden; Frank Davidoff; David Stevens
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2015

2.  Effects of cognitive distraction on performance of laparoscopic surgical tasks.

Authors:  Kristen H Goodell; Caroline G L Cao; Steven D Schwaitzberg
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.878

3.  A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population.

Authors:  Alex B Haynes; Thomas G Weiser; William R Berry; Stuart R Lipsitz; Abdel-Hadi S Breizat; E Patchen Dellinger; Teodoro Herbosa; Sudhir Joseph; Pascience L Kibatala; Marie Carmela M Lapitan; Alan F Merry; Krishna Moorthy; Richard K Reznick; Bryce Taylor; Atul A Gawande
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-01-14       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

Authors:  Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.317

5.  Monitoring universal protocol compliance through real-time clandestine observation by medical students results in performance improvement.

Authors:  Catherine A Logan; Brienne D Cressey; Roger Y Wu; Adam J Janicki; Cyril X Chen; Meena L Bolourchi; Jessica L Hodnett; John D Stratigis; William C Mackey; David G Fairchild
Journal:  J Surg Educ       Date:  2011-08-27       Impact factor: 2.891

6.  Surgical site signing and "time out": issues of compliance or complacence.

Authors:  Geoffrey Johnston; Lee Ekert; Elliott Pally
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 7.  Feasibility and Design of an Electronic Surgical Safety Checklist in a Teaching Hospital: A User-Based Approach.

Authors:  Karin Kiefel; Klaus Donsa; Peter Tiefenbacher; Robert Mischak; Gernot Brunner; Gerald Sendlhofer; Thomas Pieber
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2018

8.  Disruptions in surgical flow and their relationship to surgical errors: an exploratory investigation.

Authors:  Douglas A Wiegmann; Andrew W ElBardissi; Joseph A Dearani; Richard C Daly; Thoralf M Sundt
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication.

Authors:  Lorelei Lingard; Glenn Regehr; Beverley Orser; Richard Reznick; G Ross Baker; Diane Doran; Sherry Espin; John Bohnen; Sarah Whyte
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2008-01

10.  Improving operating room safety.

Authors:  Scott N Hurlbert; Jill Garrett
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2009-11-20
View more
  3 in total

1.  In Response.

Authors:  Robert E Freundlich; Jonathan P Wanderer; Brian S Rothman; Warren S Sandberg; Jesse M Ehrenfeld
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 5.108

2.  Safe preoperative regional nerve blocks.

Authors:  Joseph Christopher Arbizo; Kajal Dalal; Veronia Lao; Frank Rosinia; Temiloluwa Adejuyigbe
Journal:  BMJ Open Qual       Date:  2022-01

3.  Timeout procedure in paediatric surgery: effective tool or lip service? A randomised prospective observational study.

Authors:  Oliver J Muensterer; Hendrik Kreutz; Alicia Poplawski; Jan Goedeke
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 7.035

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.