Proposal for a complementary safety checklist for spine surgery.

Antonio José Vargas López, Gador Ramos Bosquet, Carlos Fernández Carballal
{"title":"Proposal for a complementary safety checklist for spine surgery.","authors":"Antonio José Vargas López, Gador Ramos Bosquet, Carlos Fernández Carballal","doi":"10.1016/j.neucie.2024.07.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Once the World Health Oraganization (WHO) generic surgical checklist has been standardized and following the itinerary proposed, it is up to the different specialties to continue advancing in the improvement and adjustment of the checklists to their specific procedures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Through a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) in which professionals from the surgical area of ​​the Torrecárdenas University Hospital, Jaén Hospital Complex and Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital participated, aspects that threaten patient safety in spine surgery and that are not included in the WHO generic surgical checklist were proposed. The authors scored each of the proposed items incrementally based on the degree of suitability. Based on the score obtained, they selected those who would be incorporated into the specific safety checklist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of twenty-one candidate items were proposed to be part of the specific check list. These obtained scores between 15 and 11 points. After scoring them, it was decided to include the thirteen best rated in the definitive surgical checklist, seven of them in the initial phase, two in the phase prior to the incision and another four in the final part of the checklist prior to the completion of the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Professionals in the surgical area of ​​Neurosurgery can identify aspects not included in the generic checklist whose non-compliance can affect patient safety in spine surgery to at least the same extent as those included in WHO checklist. It is possible to propose a specific complementary checklist for spinal surgery, responsible for collecting aspects related to safety and success in these procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":74273,"journal":{"name":"Neurocirugia (English Edition)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocirugia (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucie.2024.07.006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Once the World Health Oraganization (WHO) generic surgical checklist has been standardized and following the itinerary proposed, it is up to the different specialties to continue advancing in the improvement and adjustment of the checklists to their specific procedures.

Methods: Through a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) in which professionals from the surgical area of ​​the Torrecárdenas University Hospital, Jaén Hospital Complex and Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital participated, aspects that threaten patient safety in spine surgery and that are not included in the WHO generic surgical checklist were proposed. The authors scored each of the proposed items incrementally based on the degree of suitability. Based on the score obtained, they selected those who would be incorporated into the specific safety checklist.

Results: A total of twenty-one candidate items were proposed to be part of the specific check list. These obtained scores between 15 and 11 points. After scoring them, it was decided to include the thirteen best rated in the definitive surgical checklist, seven of them in the initial phase, two in the phase prior to the incision and another four in the final part of the checklist prior to the completion of the procedure.

Conclusions: Professionals in the surgical area of ​​Neurosurgery can identify aspects not included in the generic checklist whose non-compliance can affect patient safety in spine surgery to at least the same extent as those included in WHO checklist. It is possible to propose a specific complementary checklist for spinal surgery, responsible for collecting aspects related to safety and success in these procedures.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脊柱手术安全检查补充清单提案。
导言:世界卫生组织(WHO)的通用手术检查表一旦标准化并按照建议的路线执行,就需要各专科根据各自的具体程序不断改进和调整检查表:来自托雷卡德纳斯大学医院、哈恩综合医院和格雷戈里奥-马拉尼翁大学综合医院外科领域的专业人员参与了故障模式和影响分析(FMEA),通过该分析,提出了威胁脊柱外科患者安全且未列入世界卫生组织通用手术清单的问题。作者根据合适程度对提出的每个项目进行逐步评分。根据所得分数,他们选出了将纳入特定安全核对表的项目:结果:总共提出了 21 个候选项目,作为具体检查清单的一部分。这些项目的得分在 15 分至 11 分之间。经过评分,决定将评分最高的 13 个项目纳入最终的手术核对表,其中 7 个列入初始阶段,2 个列入切口前阶段,另外 4 个列入手术完成前核对表的最后部分:结论:神经外科手术领域的专业人员可以找出通用核对表中未包括的方面,这些方面如果不符合要求,对脊柱手术中患者安全的影响程度至少与世界卫生组织核对表中包括的方面相同。有可能为脊柱手术提出一个专门的补充核对表,负责收集与这些手术的安全和成功有关的方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Relationship between optic nerve length and interoptic angle in the prediction of optic chiasm location. Epidemiological aspects of syringomyelia in a 19-year old cohort of spinal cord injury patients. Mortality risk factors for adult trauma patients treated with halo brace for cervical spine fracture. Endovascular treatment of chronic subdural hematoma in a dual-trained neurosurgical unit: Results and proposal of a randomized controlled trial protocol. Cervical spine spondylodiscitis due to neglected esophageal perforation after a dilation procedure 30 years after a laringectomy and radiotherapy. Report of a case and review of literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1