Evaluation and Customization of WHO Safety Checklist for Patient Safety in Otorhinolaryngology

  • Yogesh Dabholkar
  • Haritosh Velankar
  • Sneha Suryanarayan
  • Twinkle Y. Dabholkar
  • Akanksha A. Saberwal
  • Bhavika Verma
Original Article


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 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

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

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.


  1. 1.
    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
  2. 2.
    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
  3. 3.
    Kable AK, Gibberd RW, Spigelman AD (2002) Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia. Int J Qual Health Care 14:269–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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
  5. 5.
    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
  6. 6.
    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
  7. 7.
    Shah RK, Kentala E, Healy GB et al (2004) Classification and consequences of errors in otolaryngology. Laryngoscope 114:1322–1335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shah RK, Nussenbaum B, Kienstra M et al (2010) Wrong-site sinus surgery in otolaryngology. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 143:37–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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
  10. 10.
    Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM et al (2003) Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery 133:614–621CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    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
  12. 12.
    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
  13. 13.
    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
  14. 14.
    Norton EK, Rangel SJ (2010) Implementing a pediatric surgical safety checklist in the OR and beyond. AORN J 92:61–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clark S, Hamilton L (2010) WHO surgical checklist. Needs to be customised by specialty. BMJ 340:c589CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    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
  17. 17.
    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
  18. 18.
    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
  19. 19.
    Mayo E (1933) The human problems of an industrial civilization. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    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

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yogesh Dabholkar
    • 1
  • Haritosh Velankar
    • 1
  • Sneha Suryanarayan
    • 1
  • Twinkle Y. Dabholkar
    • 2
  • Akanksha A. Saberwal
    • 1
  • Bhavika Verma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ENTD.Y. Patil University School of MedicineNerul, Navi MumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of MusculoskeletalD.Y. Patil University School of PhysiotherapyNerul, Navi MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations