Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 4/2009

Open Access 01-04-2009

Requirements for the design and implementation of checklists for surgical processes

Authors: E. G. G. Verdaasdonk, L. P. S. Stassen, P. P. Widhiasmara, J. Dankelman

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The use of checklists is a promising strategy for improving patient safety in all types of surgical processes inside and outside the operating room. This article aims to provide requirements and implementation of checklists for surgical processes.

Methods

The literature on checklist use in the operating room was reviewed based on research using Medline, Pubmed, and Google Scholar. Although all the studies showed positive effects and important benefits such as improved team cohesion, improved awareness of safety issues, and reduction of errors, their number still is limited. The motivation of team members is considered essential for compliance. Currently, no general guidelines exist for checklist design in the surgical field. Based on the authors’ experiences and on guidelines used in the aviation industry, requirements for the checklist design are proposed. The design depends on the checklist purpose, philosophy, and method chosen. The methods consist of the “call-do-response” approach,” the “do-verify” approach, or a combination of both. The advantages and disadvantages of paper versus electronic solutions are discussed. Furthermore, a step-by-step strategy of how to implement a checklist in the clinical situation is suggested.

Conclusions

The use of structured checklists in surgical processes is most likely to be effective because it standardizes human performance and ensures that procedures are followed correctly instead of relying on human memory alone. Several studies present promising and positive first results, providing a solid basis for further investigation. Future research should focus on the effect of various checklist designs and strategies to ensure maximal compliance.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldsen MS (1999) To err is human. Institute of Medicine, Washington DC, pp 1–14 Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldsen MS (1999) To err is human. Institute of Medicine, Washington DC, pp 1–14
2.
go back to reference Wagner C, de Bruijne M (2007) Onbedoelde schade in Nederlandse ziekenhuizen. Nederlands Instituut voor onderzoek van de gezondheidszorg (NIVEL) p 20 Wagner C, de Bruijne M (2007) Onbedoelde schade in Nederlandse ziekenhuizen. Nederlands Instituut voor onderzoek van de gezondheidszorg (NIVEL) p 20
3.
go back to reference Leape L (1994) The preventibility of medical injury. In: Bogner MS (ed) Human error in medicine. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ Leape L (1994) The preventibility of medical injury. In: Bogner MS (ed) Human error in medicine. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ
5.
go back to reference Calland JF, Guerlain S, Adams RB, Tribble CG, Foley E, Chekan EG (2002) A systems approach to surgical safety. Surg Endosc 16:1005–1014 discussion 1015PubMedCrossRef Calland JF, Guerlain S, Adams RB, Tribble CG, Foley E, Chekan EG (2002) A systems approach to surgical safety. Surg Endosc 16:1005–1014 discussion 1015PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Dankelman J, Grimbergen CA (2005) Systems approach to reduce errors in surgery. Surg Endosc 19:1017–1021PubMedCrossRef Dankelman J, Grimbergen CA (2005) Systems approach to reduce errors in surgery. Surg Endosc 19:1017–1021PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi AW (2004) Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg 239:475–482PubMedCrossRef Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi AW (2004) Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg 239:475–482PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Undre S, Healey AN, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2006) Observational assessment of surgical teamwork: a feasibility study. World J Surg 30:1774–1783PubMedCrossRef Undre S, Healey AN, Darzi A, Vincent CA (2006) Observational assessment of surgical teamwork: a feasibility study. World J Surg 30:1774–1783PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, van der Elst M, Karsten TM, Dankelman J (2007) Problems with technical equipment during laparoscopic surgery: an observational study. Surg Endosc 21:275–279PubMedCrossRef Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, van der Elst M, Karsten TM, Dankelman J (2007) Problems with technical equipment during laparoscopic surgery: an observational study. Surg Endosc 21:275–279PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Saufl NM (2004) Universal protocol for preventing wrong-site, wrong-procedure, wrong-person surgery. J Perianesth Nurs 19:348–351PubMedCrossRef Saufl NM (2004) Universal protocol for preventing wrong-site, wrong-procedure, wrong-person surgery. J Perianesth Nurs 19:348–351PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kwaan MR, Studdert DM, Zinner MJ, Gawande AA (2006) Incidence, patterns, and prevention of wrong-site surgery. Arch Surg 141:353–357 discussion 357–358PubMedCrossRef Kwaan MR, Studdert DM, Zinner MJ, Gawande AA (2006) Incidence, patterns, and prevention of wrong-site surgery. Arch Surg 141:353–357 discussion 357–358PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Michaels RK, Makary MA, Dahab Y, Frassica FJ, Heitmiller E, Rowen LC, Crotreau R, Brem H, Pronovost PJ (2007) Achieving the National Quality Forum’s “Never Events”: prevention of wrong-site, wrong-procedure, and wrong-patient operations. Ann Surg 245:526–532PubMedCrossRef Michaels RK, Makary MA, Dahab Y, Frassica FJ, Heitmiller E, Rowen LC, Crotreau R, Brem H, Pronovost PJ (2007) Achieving the National Quality Forum’s “Never Events”: prevention of wrong-site, wrong-procedure, and wrong-patient operations. Ann Surg 245:526–532PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Lingard L, Espin S, Rubin B, Whyte S, Colmenares M, Baker GR, Doran D, Grober E, Orser B, Bohnen J, Reznick R (2005) Getting teams to talk: development and pilot implementation of a checklist to promote interprofessional communication in the OR. Qual Saf Health Care 14(5):340–346PubMedCrossRef Lingard L, Espin S, Rubin B, Whyte S, Colmenares M, Baker GR, Doran D, Grober E, Orser B, Bohnen J, Reznick R (2005) Getting teams to talk: development and pilot implementation of a checklist to promote interprofessional communication in the OR. Qual Saf Health Care 14(5):340–346PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Makary MA, Mukherjee A, Sexton JB, Syin D, Goodrich E, Hartmann E, Rowen L, Behrens DC, Marohn M, Pronovost PJ (2007) Operating room briefings and wrong-site surgery. J Am Coll Surg 204:236–243PubMedCrossRef Makary MA, Mukherjee A, Sexton JB, Syin D, Goodrich E, Hartmann E, Rowen L, Behrens DC, Marohn M, Pronovost PJ (2007) Operating room briefings and wrong-site surgery. J Am Coll Surg 204:236–243PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Makary MA, Holzmueller CG, Thompson D, Rowen L, Heitmiller ES, Maley WR, Black JH, Stegner K, Freischlag JA, Ulatowski JA, Pronovost PJ (2006) Operating room briefings: working on the same page. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 32(6):351–355PubMed Makary MA, Holzmueller CG, Thompson D, Rowen L, Heitmiller ES, Maley WR, Black JH, Stegner K, Freischlag JA, Ulatowski JA, Pronovost PJ (2006) Operating room briefings: working on the same page. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 32(6):351–355PubMed
18.
go back to reference Leonard M, Graham S, Bonacum D (2004) The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care. Qual Saf Health Care 13(Suppl 1):i85–i90PubMedCrossRef Leonard M, Graham S, Bonacum D (2004) The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care. Qual Saf Health Care 13(Suppl 1):i85–i90PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference DeFontes J, Surbida S (2004) Preoperative safety briefing project. Permanente J 8:21–27 DeFontes J, Surbida S (2004) Preoperative safety briefing project. Permanente J 8:21–27
20.
go back to reference Berge JA, Gramstad L, Grimnes S (1994) An evaluation of a time-saving anaesthetic machine checkout procedure. Eur J Anaesthesiol 11:493–498PubMed Berge JA, Gramstad L, Grimnes S (1994) An evaluation of a time-saving anaesthetic machine checkout procedure. Eur J Anaesthesiol 11:493–498PubMed
21.
go back to reference Barthram C, McClymont W (1992) The use of a checklist for anaesthetic machines. Anaesthesia 47:1066–1069PubMedCrossRef Barthram C, McClymont W (1992) The use of a checklist for anaesthetic machines. Anaesthesia 47:1066–1069PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference March MG, Crowley JJ (1991) An evaluation of anesthesiologists’ present checkout methods and the validity of the FDA checklist. Anesthesiology 75:724–729PubMedCrossRef March MG, Crowley JJ (1991) An evaluation of anesthesiologists’ present checkout methods and the validity of the FDA checklist. Anesthesiology 75:724–729PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Manley R, Cuddeford JD (1996) An assessment of the effectiveness of the revised FDA checklist. Aana J 64:277–282PubMed Manley R, Cuddeford JD (1996) An assessment of the effectiveness of the revised FDA checklist. Aana J 64:277–282PubMed
24.
go back to reference Berge JA, Gramstad L, Jensen O (1993) A training simulator for detecting equipment failure in the anaesthetic machine. Eur J Anaesthesiol 10:19–24PubMed Berge JA, Gramstad L, Jensen O (1993) A training simulator for detecting equipment failure in the anaesthetic machine. Eur J Anaesthesiol 10:19–24PubMed
25.
go back to reference Blike G, Biddle C (2000) Preanesthesia detection of equipment faults by anesthesia providers at an academic hospital: comparison of standard practice and a new electronic checklist. Aana J 68:497–505PubMed Blike G, Biddle C (2000) Preanesthesia detection of equipment faults by anesthesia providers at an academic hospital: comparison of standard practice and a new electronic checklist. Aana J 68:497–505PubMed
26.
27.
go back to reference Hart EM, Owen H (2005) Errors and omissions in anesthesia: a pilot study using a pilot’s checklist. Anesth Analg 101:246–250. table of contentsPubMedCrossRef Hart EM, Owen H (2005) Errors and omissions in anesthesia: a pilot study using a pilot’s checklist. Anesth Analg 101:246–250. table of contentsPubMedCrossRef
28.
31.
go back to reference Degani A, Wiener EL (1990) Human factors of flight deck checklists: the normal checklist. NASA Contractor Report 177549 Degani A, Wiener EL (1990) Human factors of flight deck checklists: the normal checklist. NASA Contractor Report 177549
32.
go back to reference Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press
33.
go back to reference Degani A, Wiener EL (1993) Cockpit checklists: concepts, design, and use. Hum Factors 35(2):28–43 Degani A, Wiener EL (1993) Cockpit checklists: concepts, design, and use. Hum Factors 35(2):28–43
34.
go back to reference Diamond T, Mole DJ (2005) Anatomical orientation and cross-checking, the key to safer laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 92:663–664PubMedCrossRef Diamond T, Mole DJ (2005) Anatomical orientation and cross-checking, the key to safer laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 92:663–664PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Rouse SH, Rouse WB (1980) Computer-based manuals for procedural information. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 10(8):506–510 Rouse SH, Rouse WB (1980) Computer-based manuals for procedural information. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 10(8):506–510
36.
go back to reference Palmer E, Degani A (1994) Electronic checklists: evaluation of two levels of automation. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Aviation Psychology Symposium. Ohio State Univeristy, Columbus, OH Palmer E, Degani A (1994) Electronic checklists: evaluation of two levels of automation. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Aviation Psychology Symposium. Ohio State Univeristy, Columbus, OH
38.
go back to reference Punt MM, Stefels CN, Grimbergen CA, Dankelman J (2005) Evaluation of voice control, touch panel control, and assistant control during steering of an endoscope. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 14:181–187PubMedCrossRef Punt MM, Stefels CN, Grimbergen CA, Dankelman J (2005) Evaluation of voice control, touch panel control, and assistant control during steering of an endoscope. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 14:181–187PubMedCrossRef
40.
Metadata
Title
Requirements for the design and implementation of checklists for surgical processes
Authors
E. G. G. Verdaasdonk
L. P. S. Stassen
P. P. Widhiasmara
J. Dankelman
Publication date
01-04-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0044-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

Surgical Endoscopy 4/2009 Go to the issue