Escalation of Care in Surgery. Issue 5 (May 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Johnston, Maximilian; Arora, Sonal; Anderson, Oliver; King, Dominic; Behar, Nebil; Darzi, Ara
• Is Part Of: Annals of surgery. Volume 261:Issue 5(2015:May)
• Publication Date: 2015-05
• Subjects: Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000762
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-4932

Abstract

<abstract> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec> <title>Objective:</title> <p>To systematically risk assess and analyze the escalation of care process in surgery so as to identify problems and provide recommendations for intervention.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Background:</title> <p>The ability to escalate care appropriately when managing deteriorating patients is a hallmark of surgical competence and safe postoperative care. Healthcare-Failure-Mode-Effects-Analysis (HFMEA) is a methodology adapted from safety-critical industries, which allows for hazardous process failures to be prospectively identified and solutions to be recommended.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Methods:</title> <p>Forty-two hours of ethnographic observations on surgical wards in 3 London hospitals (phase 1) formed the basis of an escalation process diagram. A risk-assessment survey identified failures associated with process steps and attributed hazard scores (phase 2). Patient safety and clinical risk experts validated hazard scores through a group consensus meeting (phase 3). Hazardous failures were taken forward to multidisciplinary HFMEA where cause analysis was applied and interventions were recommended (phase 4).</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Results:</title> <p>Observations identified 33 steps in the escalation process. The risk-assessment survey (30 surgical staff members, 100% response) and expert consensus group identified 18 hazardous failures associated with these steps. The HFMEA team identified 3 adequately controlled failures; therefore, 15 were subjected to cause analysis. Outdated communication technology, understaffing, and hierarchical barriers were identified as root causes of failure. Participants recommended interventions based on these findings including defined escalation protocols, human factors education, enhanced communication technology, and improved clinical supervision.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Conclusions:</title> <p>Failures in the escalation process amenable to intervention were systematically identified. This mapping of the escalation process will allow tailored interventions to enhance surgical training and patient safety.</p> </sec> </abstract>