A checklist for endonasal transsphenoidal anterior skull base surgery.

OBJECT Approximately 250 million surgical procedures are performed annually worldwide, and data suggest that major complications occur in 3%-17% of them. Many of these complications can be classified as avoidable, and previous studies have demonstrated that preoperative checklists improve operating room teamwork and decrease complication rates. Although the authors' institution has instituted a general preoperative "time-out" designed to streamline communication, flatten vertical authority gradients, and decrease procedural errors, there is no specific checklist for transnasal transsphenoidal anterior skull base surgery, with or without endoscopy. Such minimally invasive cranial surgery uses a completely different conceptual approach, set-up, instrumentation, and operative procedure. Therefore, it can be associated with different types of complications as compared with open cranial surgery. The authors hypothesized that a detailed, procedure-specific, preoperative checklist would be useful to reduce errors, improve outcomes, decrease delays, and maximize both teambuilding and operational efficiency. Thus, the object of this study was to develop such a checklist for endonasal transsphenoidal anterior skull base surgery. METHODS An expert panel was convened that consisted of all members of the typical surgical team for transsphenoidal endoscopic cases: neurosurgeons, anesthesiologists, circulating nurses, scrub technicians, surgical operations managers, and technical assistants. Beginning with a general checklist, procedure-specific items were added and categorized into 4 pauses: Anesthesia Pause, Surgical Pause, Equipment Pause, and Closure Pause. RESULTS The final endonasal transsphenoidal anterior skull base surgery checklist is composed of the following 4 pauses. The Anesthesia Pause consists of patient identification, diagnosis, pertinent laboratory studies, medications, surgical preparation, patient positioning, intravenous/arterial access, fluid management, monitoring, and other special considerations (e.g., Valsalva, jugular compression, lumbar drain, and so on). The Surgical Pause is composed of personnel introductions, planned procedural elements, estimation of duration of surgery, anticipated blood loss and fluid management, imaging, specimen collection, and questions of a surgical nature. The Equipment Pause assures proper function and availability of the microscope, endoscope, cameras and recorders, guidance systems, special instruments, ultrasonic microdoppler, microdebrider, drills, and other adjunctive supplies (e.g., Avitene, cotton balls, nasal packs, and so on). The Closure Pause is dedicated to issues of immediate postoperative patient disposition, orders, and management. CONCLUSIONS Surgical complications are a considerable cause of death and disability worldwide. Checklists have been shown to be an effective tool for reducing preventable errors surrounding surgery and decreasing associated complications. Although general checklists are already in place in most institutions, a specific checklist for endonasal transsphenoidal anterior skull base surgery was developed to help safeguard patients, improve outcomes, and enhance teambuilding.

[1]  E. Søfteland,et al.  Reply to "Letter to Editor Concerning the Article-Effect of the World Health Organization Checklist on Patient Outcomes: A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial". , 2016, Annals of surgery.

[2]  Michael Y. Wang,et al.  "Time out" for surgical safety checklists? , 2014, Neurosurgery.

[3]  A. Darzi,et al.  The WHO surgical safety checklist: survey of patients’ views , 2014, BMJ quality & safety.

[4]  Lukman Thalib,et al.  Effect of Using a Safety Checklist on Patient Complications after Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2014, Anesthesiology.

[5]  Refik Saskin,et al.  Introduction of surgical safety checklists in Ontario, Canada. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  R. Takala,et al.  Surgical safety checklist is associated with improved operating room safety culture, reduced wound complications, and unplanned readmissions in a pilot study in neurosurgery , 2014, Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society.

[7]  Gudela Grote,et al.  Shared Leadership in Multiteam Systems , 2014, Hum. Factors.

[8]  M. Boaz,et al.  Effect of Surgical Safety checklist implementation on the occurrence of postoperative complications in orthopedic patients. , 2014, The Israel Medical Association journal : IMAJ.

[9]  C. Kerber Changing our culture: adopting the military aviation safety system , 2013, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery.

[10]  Nick Sevdalis,et al.  Do Safety Checklists Improve Teamwork and Communication in the Operating Room? A Systematic Review , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[11]  D. Mehregan,et al.  A dermatology surgical safety checklist: an objective resident performance tool , 2013, International journal of dermatology.

[12]  E. Laws The endoscopic endonasal approach for recurrent pituitary lesions. , 2013, World neurosurgery.

[13]  L. Dell’Atti [Introduction of a checklist to reduce adverse events in urologic surgery: our experience]. , 2013, Urologiâ.

[14]  John E. Ziewacz,et al.  Simulation-based trial of surgical-crisis checklists. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  Hania Wehbe-Janek,et al.  Implementation of a surgical safety checklist: impact on surgical team perspectives. , 2013, The Ochsner journal.

[16]  Thomas G Weiser,et al.  Review article: Perioperative checklist methodologies , 2013, Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie.

[17]  John E. Ziewacz,et al.  Patterns in neurosurgical adverse events: endovascular neurosurgery. , 2012, Neurosurgical focus.

[18]  A. Bader,et al.  Patterns in neurosurgical adverse events and proposed strategies for reduction. , 2012, Neurosurgical focus.

[19]  Allen L. Ho,et al.  Patterns in neurosurgical adverse events: cerebrospinal fluid shunt surgery. , 2012, Neurosurgical focus.

[20]  John E. Ziewacz,et al.  Patterns in neurosurgical adverse events: intracranial neoplasm surgery. , 2012, Neurosurgical focus.

[21]  Allen L. Ho,et al.  Patterns in neurosurgical adverse events: open cerebrovascular neurosurgery. , 2012, Neurosurgical focus.

[22]  J. Mocco,et al.  Neurosurgical checklists: a review. , 2012, Neurosurgical focus.

[23]  Gary Hooper,et al.  The Time Out Procedure: have we changed our practice? , 2012, The New Zealand medical journal.

[24]  T. Ikonen,et al.  A pilot study of the implementation of WHO Surgical Checklist in Finland: improvements in activities and communication , 2011, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[25]  John E. Ziewacz,et al.  Crisis checklists for the operating room: development and pilot testing. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[26]  Sara J Singer,et al.  Effective surgical safety checklist implementation. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[27]  E. D. de Vries,et al.  Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  J. Birkmeyer Strategies for improving surgical quality--checklists and beyond. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  W. Berry,et al.  Perspectives in quality: designing the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist. , 2010, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[30]  A. Bader,et al.  Adopting a surgical safety checklist could save money and improve the quality of care in U.S. hospitals. , 2010, Health affairs.

[31]  W. Berry,et al.  A Surgical Safety Checklist to Reduce Morbidity and Mortality in a Global Population , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  A. Kaye,et al.  Role of transcranial approaches in the treatment of sellar and suprasellar lesions. , 2006, Frontiers of hormone research.

[33]  M. McDermott,et al.  Craniotomy for meningioma in the United States between 1988 and 2000: decreasing rate of mortality and the effect of provider caseload. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery.

[34]  A. Klibanski,et al.  Transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary tumors in the United States, 1996-2000: mortality, morbidity, and the effects of hospital and surgeon volume. , 2003, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[35]  J. Birkmeyer,et al.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[36]  T. Osler,et al.  Complications in surgical patients. , 2002, Archives of surgery.