McCulloch Peter, Morgan Lauren, New Steve, Catchpole Ken, Roberston Eleanor, Hadi Mohammed, Pickering Sharon, Collins Gary, Griffin Damian
*Quality, Reliability Safety & Teamwork Unit, Nuffield Department of Surgical Science †Said Business School, University of Oxford, UK ‡Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA §Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford ¶Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Warwick ||Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Ann Surg. 2017 Jan;265(1):90-96. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001589.
Patient safety improvement interventions usually address either work systems or team culture. We do not know which is more effective, or whether combining approaches is beneficial.
To compare improvement in surgical team performance after interventions addressing teamwork culture, work systems, or both.
Suite of 5 identical controlled before-after intervention studies, with preplanned analysis of pooled data for indirect comparisons of strategies.
Operating theatres in 5 UK hospitals performing elective orthopedic, plastic, or vascular surgery PARTICIPANTS:: All operating theatres staff, including surgeons, nurses, anaesthetists, and others INTERVENTIONS:: 4-month safety improvement interventions, using teamwork training (TT), systems redesign and standardization (SOP), Lean quality improvement, SOP + TT combination, or Lean + TT combination.
Team technical and nontechnical performance and World Health Organization (WHO) checklist compliance, measured for 3 months before and after intervention using validated scales. Pooled data analysis of before-after change in active and control groups, comparing combined versus single and systems versus teamwork interventions, using 2-way ANOVA.
We studied 453 operations, (255 intervention, 198 control). TT improved nontechnical skills and WHO compliance (P < 0.001), but not technical performance; systems interventions (Lean & SOP, 2 & 3) improved nontechnical skills and technical performance (P < 0.001) but improved WHO compliance less. Combined interventions (4 & 5) improved all performance measures except WHO time-out attempts, whereas single approaches (1 & 2 & 3) improved WHO compliance less (P < 0.001) and failed to improve technical performance.
CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE: Safety interventions combining teamwork training and systems rationalization are more effective than those adopting either approach alone. This has important implications for safety improvement strategies in hospitals.
患者安全改善干预措施通常针对工作系统或团队文化。我们不知道哪种更有效,或者将两种方法结合是否有益。
比较针对团队合作文化、工作系统或两者的干预措施后手术团队绩效的改善情况。
5项相同的干预前后对照研究系列,对汇总数据进行预先计划的分析,以间接比较策略。
英国5家医院的手术室,进行择期骨科、整形或血管外科手术
所有手术室工作人员,包括外科医生、护士、麻醉师及其他人员
为期4个月的安全改善干预措施,采用团队合作培训(TT)、系统重新设计与标准化(SOP)、精益质量改进、SOP+TT组合或精益+TT组合。
使用经过验证的量表在干预前后3个月测量团队技术和非技术绩效以及世界卫生组织(WHO)检查表合规情况。使用双向方差分析对活动组和对照组干预前后的变化进行汇总数据分析,比较联合干预与单一干预以及系统干预与团队合作干预。
我们研究了453例手术(255例干预,198例对照)。团队合作培训改善了非技术技能和WHO检查表合规情况(P<0.001),但未改善技术绩效;系统干预(精益和SOP,2和3)改善了非技术技能和技术绩效(P<0.001),但对WHO检查表合规情况的改善较少。联合干预(4和5)改善了除WHO暂停尝试时间外的所有绩效指标,而单一方法(1、2和3)对WHO检查表合规情况的改善较少(P<0.001),且未能改善技术绩效。
将团队合作培训与系统合理化相结合的安全干预措施比单独采用任何一种方法都更有效。这对医院的安全改善策略具有重要意义。