Cited by 14Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesSurgical site infection prevention

Surgical safety checklist implementation and its impact on patient safety

Open access
Dinesh, H. N., R. S., Ravya, V., Sunil Kumar·2018·International Surgery Journal

Abstract

Background: Surgery has become an integral part of global health care, with an estimated 234 million operations performed yearly. Surgical complications are common and often preventable. Although surgical and anesthetic caregivers seek to deliver optimal quality in peri-operative service, surgery still carries considerable risk for the patient. WHO surgical safety checklist outlines essential standards of surgical care and has been shown to reduce complications and death associated with surgery.Methods: Pre-intervention and post-intervention study. The effect on patient outcomes and documentation of WHO surgical safety checklist was examined. After an education programme, the checklist implementation and patient safety outcome indicators were studied.Results: Checklist compliance increased over time. The median number of items documented was 16. After implementation of the checklist, mortality decreased from 3.13% to 2.85%. Most causes of death did not significantly differ between the implementation periods, except for multiorgan failure and major bleeding. Adjustment of the association between implementation period and outcome for all variables revealed a decreased mortality after checklist implementation.Conclusions: Implementation of the checklist showed improved outcomes. Use of the WHO surgical safety checklist in urgent operations is feasible and should be considered. Implementation proved neither costly nor lengthy. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and reveal additional factors supportive of checklist implementation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18203/2349-2902.isj20184637

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [8]8. Van Klei WA, Hoff RG, van Aarnhem EEHL. Effects of the introduction of the WHO surgical safety checklist on In-hospital mortality: a cohort study. Ann Surg. 2012;255:44-9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dinesh, H. N., R. S., R., & V., S. K.
Affiliations
Mysore Medical College (IN)
Venue
International Surgery Journal
Publisher
Medip Academy
Published
2018-10-26
Volume
5
Issue
11
Pages
3640
ISSN
  • 2349-2902 (ISSN-L)
  • 2349-3305
OpenAlex
W2898595176
Cited by
14
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Surgery Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical site infection prevention
Keywords
WHO Surgical Safety Checklist, surgical safety, patient safety, checklist compliance, postoperative mortality, surgical complications, perioperative care, checklist implementation, employee training, urgent surgery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review