JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zohar, E. Articles by Fredman, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zohar, E. Articles by Fredman, B. Related Collections Economics and Health Care Research Operating Rooms Patient Safety

---

ECONOMICS, EDUCATION, AND POLICY

Perioperative Patient Safety: Correct Patient, Correct Surgery, Correct Side—A Multifaceted, Cross-Organizational, Interventional Study

Edna Zohar, MD, MHA^*, Yossi Noga, BSc, MD, MHA^*, Ehud Davidson, MD, Margalit Kantor, RN, MA, and Brian Fredman, MB, BCh^*

From the *Departments of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management; and Hospital Administration, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba, The Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Brian Fredman, MB BCh, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba 44281, Israel. Address e-mail to Fredman.Brian{at}clalit.org.il.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is important to ensure a patient-safe environment in the perioperative setting. With this in mind, a "patient-safety first" philosophy was adopted within our operating room service.

METHODS: During the first phase of the interventional study (2001–2002), we defined and executed the organizational and educational aspects of the intervention. Thereafter, the implementation phase (2003–2005) was performed. According to our zero tolerance policy, in the event that a major error in patient readiness for anesthesia and surgery was found in the operating room holding area, the patient would be returned to the parent department ("failure") and the surgical procedure delayed until the major error was corrected.

RESULTS: The data of 15,856 patients were recorded. During the 3-yr implementation period, 112 patients (0.71%) were returned to the department. A statistically significant (P < 0.002) reduction in major errors was recorded when comparing the year 2003 to the years 2004 and 2005 (1.04, 0.59, and 0.49% for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively). Furthermore, stepwise logistic regression demonstrated a time-dependant significant decrease in the incidence of a major error that resulted from inadequate patient preparation (odds ratio = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.16–1.87). In addition, the mean time between failures was 6.6, 11.2, and 14.7 days for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively (P < 0.03). Finally, a significant (P < 0.0001) improvement in patient preparation over time, as well as the overall probability that the patient preparation score = 100% (P < 0.001), were demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS: Education and increased awareness can decrease perioperative errors. However, even with a carefully designed policy in place, an error-free environment was not achieved. Therefore, monitoring and system analysis should be performed on a continuing basis.

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999