Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32885205›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2020

Reducing work pressure and IT problems and facilitating IT integration and audit & feedback help adherence to perioperative safety guidelines: a survey among 95 perioperative professionals.

Yvette E J J M Emond, André P Wolff, Yvonne A S Peters, Gerrit J A Bloo, Gert P Westert, Johan Damen, Hiske Calsbeek, Hub C Wollersheim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yvette E J J M EmondRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2317-2388
André P WolffUniversity Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Center, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Yvonne A S PetersRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Gerrit J A BlooRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Gert P WestertRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Johan DamenRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Care, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hiske CalsbeekRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hub C WollersheimRadboudumc, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo improve perioperative patient safety, guidelines for the preoperative, peroperative, and postoperative phase were introduced in the Netherlands between 2010 and 2013. To help the implementation of these guidelines, we aimed to get a better understanding of the barriers and drivers of perioperative guideline adherence and to explore what can be learned for future implementation projects in complex organizations.

methodsWe developed a questionnaire survey based on the theoretical framework of Van Sluisveld et al. for classifying barriers and facilitators. The questionnaire contained 57 statements derived from (a) an instrument for measuring determinants of innovations by the Dutch Organization for Applied Scientific Research, (b) interviews with quality and safety policy officers and perioperative professionals, and (c) a publication of Cabana et al. The target group consisted of 232 perioperative professionals in nine hospitals. In addition to rating the statements on a five-point Likert scale (which were classified into the seven categories of the framework: factors relating to the intervention, society, implementation, organization, professional, patients, and social factors), respondents were invited to rank their three most important barriers in a separate, extra open-ended question.

resultsNinety-five professionals (41%) completed the questionnaire. Fifteen statements (26%) were considered to be barriers, relating to social factors (

conclusionsWe identified a wide range of barriers that are believed to hinder the use of the perioperative safety guidelines, while an integrated information system and local data collection and feedback will also be necessary to engage perioperative teams. These barriers need to be locally prioritized and addressed by tailored implementation strategies. These results may also be of relevance for guideline implementation in general in complex organizations.

trial registrationDutch Trial Registry: NTR3568.

Indexed as

Guideline adherenceImplementationImplementation barriersImplementation facilitatorsPatient safetyPerioperative care

Identifiers

PMID32885205
PMCPMC7427904
OpenAlexW3032620417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.