Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
BMJ Open. 2013 Aug 15;3(8):e003039. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003039.
Bold claims have been made for the ability of the WHO surgical checklist to reduce surgical morbidity and mortality and improve patient safety regardless of the setting. Little is known about how far the challenges faced by low-income countries are the same as those in high-income countries or different. We aimed to identify and compare the influences on checklist implementation and compliance in the UK and Africa.
Ethnographic study involving observations, interviews and collection of documents. Thematic analysis of the data.
Operating theatres in one African university hospital and two UK university hospitals.
112 h of observations were undertaken. Interviews with 39 theatre and administrative staff were conducted.
Many staff saw value in the checklist in the UK and African hospitals. Some resentment was present in all settings, linked to conflicts between the philosophy behind the checklist and the realities of local cultural, social and economic contexts. Compliance-involving use, completeness and fidelity-was considerably higher, though not perfect, in the UK settings. In these hospitals, compliance was supported by established structures and systems, and was not significantly undermined by major resource constraints; the same was not true of the low-income context. Hierarchical relationships were a major barrier to implementation in all settings, but were more marked in the low-income setting. Introducing a checklist in a professional environment characterised by a lack of accountability and transparency could make the staff feel jeopardised legally, professionally, and personally, and it encouraged them to make misleading records of what had actually been done.
Surgical checklist implementation is likely to be optimised, regardless of the setting, when used as a tool in multifaceted cultural and organisational programmes to strengthen patient safety. It cannot be assumed that the introduction of a checklist will automatically lead to improved communication and clinical processes.
有人夸大口说,世卫组织手术核对表能够降低手术发病率和死亡率,并提高患者安全性,无论在何种环境下均能如此。但我们对低收入国家面临的挑战与高收入国家有何相同或不同之处知之甚少。我们旨在确定并比较英国和非洲实施和遵守手术核对表的影响因素。
涉及观察、访谈和文件收集的民族志研究。对数据进行主题分析。
一家非洲大学医院和两家英国大学医院的手术室。
进行了 112 小时的观察。对 39 名手术室和行政人员进行了访谈。
在英国和非洲医院,许多工作人员认为核对表有价值。在所有环境中都存在一些不满,这与核对表背后的理念与当地文化、社会和经济背景的现实之间的冲突有关。在英国环境中,合规性——包括使用、完整性和保真度——尽管不完美,但要高得多。在这些医院,合规性得到了既定结构和系统的支持,并且没有因重大资源限制而受到严重破坏;在低收入环境中则并非如此。在所有环境中,等级关系都是实施的主要障碍,但在低收入环境中更为明显。在缺乏问责制和透明度的专业环境中引入核对表可能会使工作人员在法律、职业和个人方面感到受到威胁,并鼓励他们对实际所做的事情做出误导性记录。
无论环境如何,通过将手术核对表用作加强患者安全的多方面文化和组织计划中的工具,其实施情况可能会得到优化。不能假设引入核对表会自动导致沟通和临床流程的改善。