Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Perceived barriers to computerised quality documentation during anaesthesia: a survey of anaesthesia staff


Wacker, Johannes; Steurer, Johann; Manser, Tanja; Leisinger, Elke; Stocker, Reto; Mols, Georg (2015). Perceived barriers to computerised quality documentation during anaesthesia: a survey of anaesthesia staff. BMC Anesthesiology, 15(13):online.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Underreporting of intraoperative events in anaesthesia is well-known and compromises quality documentation. The reasons for such omissions remain unclear. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey of anaesthesia staff to explore perceived barriers to reliable documentation during anaesthesia.
METHODS: Participants anonymously completed a paper-based questionnaire. Predefined answers referred to potential barriers. Additional written comments were encouraged. Differences between physician and nurse anaesthetists were tested with t-tests and chi-square tests.
RESULTS: Twenty-five physician and 30 nurse anaesthetists (81% of total staff) completed the survey. The reported problems referred to three main categories: (I) potential influences related to working conditions and practices of data collection, such as premature entry of the data (indicated by 85% of the respondents), competing duties (87%), and interfering interruptions or noise (67%); (II) problems referring to institutional management of the data, for example lacking feedback on the results (95%) and lacking knowledge about what the data are used for (75%); (III) problems related to specific attitudes, e.g., considering these data not useful for quality improvement (47%). Physicians were more sceptical than nurses regarding the relevance of these data for quality and patient safety.
CONCLUSIONS: The common perceived difficulties reported by physician and nurse anaesthetists resemble established barriers to incident reporting and may similarly act as barriers to quality documentation during anaesthesia. Further studies should investigate if these perceived obstacles have a causal impact on quality reporting in anaesthesia.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT01524484. Registration date: January 21, 2012.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Underreporting of intraoperative events in anaesthesia is well-known and compromises quality documentation. The reasons for such omissions remain unclear. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey of anaesthesia staff to explore perceived barriers to reliable documentation during anaesthesia.
METHODS: Participants anonymously completed a paper-based questionnaire. Predefined answers referred to potential barriers. Additional written comments were encouraged. Differences between physician and nurse anaesthetists were tested with t-tests and chi-square tests.
RESULTS: Twenty-five physician and 30 nurse anaesthetists (81% of total staff) completed the survey. The reported problems referred to three main categories: (I) potential influences related to working conditions and practices of data collection, such as premature entry of the data (indicated by 85% of the respondents), competing duties (87%), and interfering interruptions or noise (67%); (II) problems referring to institutional management of the data, for example lacking feedback on the results (95%) and lacking knowledge about what the data are used for (75%); (III) problems related to specific attitudes, e.g., considering these data not useful for quality improvement (47%). Physicians were more sceptical than nurses regarding the relevance of these data for quality and patient safety.
CONCLUSIONS: The common perceived difficulties reported by physician and nurse anaesthetists resemble established barriers to incident reporting and may similarly act as barriers to quality documentation during anaesthesia. Further studies should investigate if these perceived obstacles have a causal impact on quality reporting in anaesthesia.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT01524484. Registration date: January 21, 2012.

Statistics

Citations

1 citation in Web of Science®
1 citation in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

10 downloads since deposited on 17 Nov 2015
7 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic and Policlinic for Internal Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:31 January 2015
Deposited On:17 Nov 2015 09:40
Last Modified:20 Aug 2017 22:40
Publisher:BioMed Central
ISSN:1471-2253
Free access at:PubMed ID. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-15-13
PubMed ID:25971791

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 466kB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Article Networks

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations