Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-1336-3464
Checklist feasibility and impact in gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and narrative synthesis
Abstract
Background and study aim Checklists prevent errors and have a positive impact on patient morbidity and mortality in surgical settings. Despite increasing use of checklists in gastrointestinal endoscopy units across many countries, a summary of cumulated experience is lacking. The aim of this study was to identify and evaluate the feasibility of successful checklist implementation in gastrointestinal endoscopy units and summarise the evidence of its impact on the commitment in safety culture.
Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed identifying the use of a checklist or time-out in endoscopy units from 1978 to January 2020 using OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases, with search terms related to checklist and endoscopy. We summarised overall adherence to checklists from included studies through a narrative synthesis, characterizing barriers and facilitators according to nurse and physician perspectives, while also summarizing safety endpoints.
Results The seven studies selected from 673 screened citations were highly heterogeneous in terms of methodology, context, and outcomes. Across five of these, checklist adherence rates post-intervention varied for both nurses (84 % to 96 %) and physicians (66 % to 95 %). Various facilitators (education, continued reassessment) and barriers (lack of safety culture, checklist completion time) were identified. Most studies did not report associations between checklist implementation and clinical outcomes, except for better team communication.
Conclusion Implementation of a gastrointestinal endoscopy checklist is feasible, with an understanding of relevant barriers and facilitators. Apart from a significant increase in the perception of team communication, evidence for a measurable impact attributable to gastrointestinal checklist implementation on endoscopic processes and safety outcomes is limited and warrants further study.
Publication History
Received: 02 October 2020
Accepted: 28 October 2020
Article published online:
19 February 2021
© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Kheraj R, Tewani SK, Ketwaroo G. et al. Quality improvement in gastroenterology clinical practice. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 10: 1305-1314
- 2 Rizk MK, Sawhney MS, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators common to all GI endoscopic procedures. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 110: 48-59
- 3 Crispin A, Birkner B, Munte A. et al. Process quality and incidence of acute complications in a series of more than 230,000 outpatient colonoscopies. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 1018-1025
- 4 Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT. et al. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut 2012; 62: 242-249
- 5 WHO. The Surgical Safety Checklist. World Health Organisation; 2008 http://www.who.int/patientsafety/safesurgery/tools_resources/SSSL_Checklist_finalJun08.pdf
- 6 Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR. et al. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 491-499
- 7 Borchard A, Schwappach DL, Barbir A. et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness, compliance, and critical factors for implementation of safety checklists in surgery. Ann Surg 2012; 256: 925-933
- 8 Ko HC, Turner TJ, Finnigan MA. Systematic review of safety checklists for use by medical care teams in acute hospital settings--limited evidence of effectiveness. BMC Health Ser Res 2011; 11: 211
- 9 Dubois H, Schmidt PT, Creutzfeldt J. et al. Person-centered endoscopy safety checklist: Development, implementation, and evaluation. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23: 8605-8614
- 10 Kherad O, Restellini S, Ménard C. et al. Implementation of a checklist before colonoscopy: a quality improvement initiative. Endoscopy 2017; 50: 203-210
- 11 Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A. et al. Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews. A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme Im. 2020 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark_Rodgers4/publication/233866356_Guidance_on_the_conduct_of_narrative_synthesis_in_systematic_reviews_A_product_from_the_ESRC_Methods_Programme/links/02e7e5231e8f3a6183000000/Guidance-on-the-conduct-of-narrative-synthesis-in-systematic-reviews-A-product-from-the-ESRC-Methods-Programme.pdf
- 12 Lingard L, Espin S, Whyte S. et al. Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Qual Saf Health Care 2004; 13: 330-334
- 13 The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for assessing the quailty of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2009 http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
- 14 Coriat R, Lecler A, Lamarque D. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy procedures: a prospective multicentre method for endoscopy units. PLoS One 2012; 7: e33957
- 15 Coriat R, Pommaret E, Chryssostalis A. et al. Quality control of colonoscopy procedures: a prospective validated method for the evaluation of professional practices applicable to all endoscopic units. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 2008; 33: 103-108
- 16 Matharoo M, Thomas-Gibson S, Haycock A. et al. Implementation of an endoscopy safety checklist. Frontline Gastroenterol 2013; 5: 260-265
- 17 Raphael K, Cerrone S, Sceppa E. et al. Improving patient safety in the endoscopy unit: utilization of remote video auditing to improve time-out compliance. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 90: 424-429
- 18 Wittren SP, Cunningham Gregor SR. et al. Using performance management to implement a preprocedural checklist for gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. Gastroenterol Nurs 2019; 42: 79-83
- 19 Walker IA, Reshamwalla S, Wilson IH. Surgical safety checklists: do they improve outcomes?. Br J Anaesth 2012; 109: 47-54
- 20 Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S. et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2725-2732
- 21 Fourcade A, Blache JL, Grenier C. et al. Barriers to staff adoption of a surgical safety checklist. BMJ Quality Safety 2011; 21: 191-197
- 22 Ramanujan R, Keyser DJ, Sirio CA. Making a case for organizational change in patient safety initiatives. In: Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation. 2005
- 23 Kristensen N, Nymann C, Konradsen H. Implementing research results in clinical practice- the experiences of healthcare professionals. BMC Health Services Res 2016; 16: 48
- 24 De Vries EN, Hollmann MW, Smorenburg SM. et al. Development and validation of the SURgical PAtient Safety System (SURPASS) checklist. Qual Saf Health Care 2009; 18: 121-126
- 25 Sewell M, Adebibe M, Jayakumar P. et al. Use of the WHO surgical safety checklist in trauma and orthopaedic patients. Int Orthop 2010; 35: 897-901
- 26 Mazzocco K, Petitti DB, Fong KT. et al. Surgical team behaviors and patient outcomes. Am J Surg 2008; 197: 678-685
- 27 Dellinger EP. Teamwork and collaboration for prevention of surgical site infections. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2016; 17: 198-202
- 28 Weiser TG, Haynes AB, Lashoher A. et al. Perspectives in quality: designing the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist. Int J Qual Health Care 2010; 22: 365-370
- 29 Nicolay CR, Purkayastha S, Greenhalgh A. et al. Systematic review of the application of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare. Br J Surg 2012; 99: 324-335
- 30 Taylor MJ, McNicholas C, Nicolay C. et al. Systematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare. BMJ Quality Safety 2014; 23: 290-298