The WHO has designed a safe surgery checklist to enhance communication and awareness of patient safety during surgery and to minimise complications. WHO recommends that the check-list be evaluated and customised by end users as a tool to promote safe surgery. The aim of present study was to evaluate the impact of WHO safety checklist on patient safety awareness in otorhinolaryngology and to customise it for the speciality. A prospective structured questionnaire based study was done in ENT operating room for duration of 1 month each for cases, before and after implementation of safe surgery checklist. The feedback from respondents (surgeons, nurses and anaesthetists) was used to arrive at a customised checklist for otolaryngology as per WHO guidelines. The checklist significantly improved team member’s awareness of patient’s identity (from 17 to 86%) and each other’s identity and roles (from 46 to 94%) and improved team communication (from 73 to 92%) in operation theatre. There was a significant improvement in preoperative check of equipment and critical events were discussed more frequently. The checklist could be effectively customised to suit otolaryngology needs as per WHO guidelines. The modified checklist needs to be validated by otolaryngology associations. We conclude from our study that the WHO Surgical safety check-list has a favourable impact on patient safety awareness, team-work and communication of operating team and can be customised for otolaryngology setting.
Safe surgery WHO checklist Customised checklist Otolaryngology
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.
Weiser TG, Regenbogen SE, Thompson KD et al (2008) An estimation of the global volume of surgery: a modeling strategy based on available data. Lancet 372:139–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Gawande AA, Thomas EJ, Zinner MJ, Brennan TA (1999) The incidence and nature of surgical adverse events in Colorado and Utah in 1992. Surgery 126:66–75CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Kable AK, Gibberd RW, Spigelman AD (2002) Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia. Int J Qual Health Care 14:269–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Bickler SW, Sanno-Duanda B (2000) Epidemiology of paediatric surgical admissions to a government referral hospital in the Gambia. Bull World Health Organ 78:1330–1336PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Yii MK, Ng KJ (2002) Risk-adjusted surgical audit with the POSSUM scoring system in a developing country. Br J Surg 89:110–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Ouro-Bang’na Maman AF, Tomta K, Ahouangbevi S, Chobli M (2005) Deaths associated with anaesthesia in Togo, West Africa. Trop Doct 35:220–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Shah RK, Kentala E, Healy GB et al (2004) Classification and consequences of errors in otolaryngology. Laryngoscope 114:1322–1335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Shah RK, Nussenbaum B, Kienstra M et al (2010) Wrong-site sinus surgery in otolaryngology. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 143:37–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Cohen FL, Mendelsohn D, Bernstein M (2010) Wrong-site craniotomy: analysis of 35 cases and systems for prevention. J Neurosurg 113(3):461–473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM et al (2003) Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery 133:614–621CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Seiden SC, Barach P (2006) Wrong-side/wrong-site, wrong procedure, and wrong patient adverse events: are they preventable? Arch Surg 141:931–939CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR et al (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. NEJM 360:491–499CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Helmio P, Takala A, Aaltonen LM et al (2012) First year with WHO surgical safety checklist in 7148 otorhinolaryngological operations: use and user attitudes. Clin Otolaryngol 37:305–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Norton EK, Rangel SJ (2010) Implementing a pediatric surgical safety checklist in the OR and beyond. AORN J 92:61–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Fudickar A, Hörle K, Wiltfang J, Bein B (2012) The effect of the WHO surgical safety checklist on complication rate and communication. Dtsch Ärztebl Int 109(42):695–701PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Helmio P, Blomgren K, Takala A, Pauniaho SL, Takala RS, Ikonen TS (2011) Towards better patient safety: WHO Surgical Safety Checklist in otorhinolaryngology. Clin Otolaryngol 36:242–247CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Sewell M, Adebibe M, Jayakumar P et al (2011) Use of the WHO surgical safety checklist in trauma and orthopaedic patients. Int Orthop 35(6):897–901CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Mayo E (1933) The human problems of an industrial civilization. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
Semel ME, Resch S, Haynes AB et al (2010) Adopting a surgical safety checklist could save money and improve the quality of care in U.S. hospitals. Health Aff (Millwood) 29(9):1593–1599CrossRefGoogle Scholar