Surgical Checklist Success in Latin America

NCT ID: NCT02646345

Last Updated: 2016-01-05

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

70639 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-07-31

Study Completion Date

2014-04-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Limited information is available about surgical checklist effectiveness in Latin America. We plan to compare the pre and post surgical checklist implementation in a tertiary healthcare center in terms of morbidity (length of stay and surgical site infection rate) and in-hospital mortality rate.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The purpose was to determine the impact of the implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist in terms of morbidity and mortality in adult surgical patients in a tertiary healthcare institution in Chile.

After Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval (Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile), a retrospective analysis of all surgical encounters on patients age 15 and above from January 2005 to December 2012 at our center will be reviewed.

Encounter data will include up to 14 diagnostic and procedure International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes, demographic data, date of admission and discharge, emergency status, healthcare system used and in-hospital death. A 5-level "high risk" variable was created in order to account for surgical complexity and associated in-hospital mortality (level 1, surgeries with \<1% in-hospital mortality; level 2, 1% to \<5%; level 3, 5% to \<10%; level 4, 10% to \<15%; level 5, \> or = 15%)6.

Surgical heterogeneity will be calculated by the Internal Herfindahl Index, which represents the diversity or comprehensiveness of the types of procedures performed at a facility.

Statistics:

Propensity score (PS) analysis will be used to control for differences in baseline characteristics. The PS is the conditional probability of receiving an exposure (e.g. checklist) given a set of measured covariates. To estimate the PS, a logistic regression model will be used in which "treatment" status (checklist performed vs. not performed) will be regressed on the baseline (pre-treatment) characteristics.

PS analysis will be implemented in two ways to control for confounding:

1. PS matching: matching will be performed using a one-to-one nearest neighbor caliper matching without replacement with a caliper size of 0.2 standard deviations. Balances in the distribution of baseline covariates will be assessed by estimating absolute standardized differences of the covariates between the two groups before and after matching. Any imbalanced covariates (standardized difference \>10%) after matching will be adjusted for in the final analysis. As the PS matched sample does not consist of independent observations, we will use a marginal regression model with robust standard errors.
2. PS weighting: the entire sample will be weighted by the inverse probability of the treatment weights derived from the PS. If a subject has a higher probability of being in a group, it will be considered over-represented and therefore will be assigned a lower weight. Conversely, if the subject has a smaller probability, it will be considered as under-represented and will be assigned a higher weight. We then will fit a weighted linear regression model using an indicator variable representing checklist intervention status as the sole predictor, and mortality as our outcome variable.

Data will be expressed as mean (SD; standard deviation) or median (IQR, interquartile range) unless otherwise stated. A two-sided p value less than 0.05 will be considered significant. The analyses will be performed using STATA v.12.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX).

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

External Causes of Morbidity and Mortality External Causes of Morbidity (V00-Y99)

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Pre Checklist

All surgical encounters before surgical checklist implementation

No interventions assigned to this group

Post Checklist

All surgical encounters after surgical checklist implementation

Surgical checklist

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Use of the World Health Organization Surgical checklist

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Surgical checklist

Use of the World Health Organization Surgical checklist

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* All surgical patients

Exclusion Criteria

* Obstetrical patients delivering vaginally
* Patients less than 15 years old
Minimum Eligible Age

15 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Hector J Lacassie, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat AH, Dellinger EP, Herbosa T, Joseph S, Kibatala PL, Lapitan MC, Merry AF, Moorthy K, Reznick RK, Taylor B, Gawande AA; Safe Surgery Saves Lives Study Group. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 29;360(5):491-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0810119. Epub 2009 Jan 14.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19144931 (View on PubMed)

de Vries EN, Ramrattan MA, Smorenburg SM, Gouma DJ, Boermeester MA. The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008 Jun;17(3):216-23. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2007.023622.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18519629 (View on PubMed)

Tscholl DW, Weiss M, Kolbe M, Staender S, Seifert B, Landert D, Grande B, Spahn DR, Noethiger CB. An Anesthesia Preinduction Checklist to Improve Information Exchange, Knowledge of Critical Information, Perception of Safety, and Possibly Perception of Teamwork in Anesthesia Teams. Anesth Analg. 2015 Oct;121(4):948-956. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000671.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25806399 (View on PubMed)

Schwarze ML, Barnato AE, Rathouz PJ, Zhao Q, Neuman HB, Winslow ER, Kennedy GD, Hu YY, Dodgion CM, Kwok AC, Greenberg CC. Development of a list of high-risk operations for patients 65 years and older. JAMA Surg. 2015 Apr;150(4):325-31. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.1819.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25692282 (View on PubMed)

Wachtel RE, Dexter F. Differentiating among hospitals performing physiologically complex operative procedures in the elderly. Anesthesiology. 2004 Jun;100(6):1552-61. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200406000-00031.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15166578 (View on PubMed)

Urbach DR, Govindarajan A, Saskin R, Wilton AS, Baxter NN. Introduction of surgical safety checklists in Ontario, Canada. N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 13;370(11):1029-38. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1308261.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24620866 (View on PubMed)

de Vries EN, Prins HA, Crolla RM, den Outer AJ, van Andel G, van Helden SH, Schlack WS, van Putten MA, Gouma DJ, Dijkgraaf MG, Smorenburg SM, Boermeester MA; SURPASS Collaborative Group. Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2010 Nov 11;363(20):1928-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0911535.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21067384 (View on PubMed)

Calland JF, Turrentine FE, Guerlain S, Bovbjerg V, Poole GR, Lebeau K, Peugh J, Adams RB. The surgical safety checklist: lessons learned during implementation. Am Surg. 2011 Sep;77(9):1131-7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21944620 (View on PubMed)

Leape LL. The checklist conundrum. N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 13;370(11):1063-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1315851. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24620871 (View on PubMed)

Conley DM, Singer SJ, Edmondson L, Berry WR, Gawande AA. Effective surgical safety checklist implementation. J Am Coll Surg. 2011 May;212(5):873-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.01.052. Epub 2011 Mar 12.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21398154 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

12-218

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.