Why isn't 'time out' being implemented? An exploratory study

被引:32
作者
Gillespie, Brigid M. [1 ,2 ]
Chaboyer, Wendy [1 ]
Wallis, Marianne [1 ,3 ]
Fenwick, Clare [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Griffith Univ, Res Ctr Clin & Community Practice Innovat, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia
[2] Griffith Univ, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia
[3] Griffith Univ, Gold Coast Hlth Serv Dist, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia
来源
QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE | 2010年 / 19卷 / 02期
关键词
THEATER;
D O I
10.1136/qshc.2008.030593
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background While there has been much discussion extolling the virtues of using 'time out' as a means of preventing the potential for sentinel events, to date there has been little examination of the issues that impact on clinicians' uptake of 'time out' in operating-room settings. Aim This study sought to methodically identify implementation and practice issues associated with the introduction and ongoing use of a 'time out' protocol in a large healthcare organisation. Methods Sixteen participants were interviewed and included surgeons, anaesthetists, nurse managers and nurses who worked at the clinical interface. Textual data were analysed using a grounded theory approach, identifying subcategories to illustrate causal relationships to the category. Results The category 'ambivalent compliance with "time out"' was the central idea that was recognised by events and behaviours that surrounded the introduction of 'time out.' Subcategories included haphazard implementation of time out, hierarchical team culture and tribal affiliations of members, and clashing clinical priorities make it difficult to incorporate 'time out' into practice, and led to 'ambivalent compliance.' Conclusion There is little doubt that using a 'time out' protocol in the operating room allows team members to share explicit confirmation of safety-related details. However, when introducing patient safety initiatives into practice, recognising compliance issues is an important first step towards identifying ways in which to address them.
引用
收藏
页码:103 / 106
页数:4
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods
[3]  
*AUSTR I HLTH WELF, 2007, SENT EV AUSTR PUBL H
[4]   A common body of care: The ethics and politics of teamwork in the operating theater are inseparable [J].
Bleakley, Alan .
JOURNAL OF MEDICINE AND PHILOSOPHY, 2006, 31 (03) :305-322
[5]   Communication Failure: Basic Components, Contributing Factors, and the Call for Structure [J].
Dayton, Elizabeth ;
Henriksen, Kerm .
JOINT COMMISSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY AND PATIENT SAFETY, 2007, 33 (01) :34-47
[6]  
Defontes James, 2004, Perm J, V8, P21
[7]  
Firth-Cozens J, 2001, QUAL HEALTH CARE, V10, P3
[8]  
*JOINT COMM ACCR H, 2007, SENT EV STAT OCT 200
[9]   Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia [J].
Kable, AK ;
Gibberd, RW ;
Spigelman, AD .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 2002, 14 (04) :269-276
[10]   Getting teams to talk: development and pilot implementation of a checklist to promote interprofessional communication in the OR [J].
Lingard, L ;
Espin, S ;
Rubin, B ;
Whyte, S ;
Colmenares, M ;
Baker, GR ;
Doran, D ;
Grober, E ;
Orser, B ;
Bohnen, J ;
Reznick, R .
QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2005, 14 (05) :340-346