Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35518377›Full record

ArticleBMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning2020

Checklist design and implementation: critical considerations to improve patient safety for low-frequency, high-risk patient events.

Carman Turkelson, Megan Keiser, Gary Sculli, Diane Capoccia

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carman TurkelsonSchool of Nursing, University of Michigan Flint, Flint, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9106-3522
Megan KeiserSchool of Nursing, University of Michigan Flint, Flint, Michigan, USA.
Gary SculliVA National Center for Patient, Ann Arbor, Michigan, UK.
Diane CapocciaDepartment of Nursing, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA.
Beaumont Health · USNational Patient Safety Foundation · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis pilot project describes the development and implementation of two specialised aviation-style checklist designs for a low-frequency high-risk patient population in a cardiac intensive care unit. The effect of the checklist design as well as the implementation strategies on patient outcomes and adherence to best practice guidelines were also explored. The long-term objective was to improve adherence to accepted processes of care by establishing the checklists as standard practice thereby improving patient safety and outcomes.

methodsDuring this project, 10specialised crisis checklists using two specific aviation-style designs were developed. A quasiexperimental prospective pre-post repeated measure design including surveys along with repetitive simulations were used to evaluate self-confidence and self-efficacy over time as well as the perceived utility, ease of use, fit into workflow and benefits of the checklists use to patients. Performance, patient outcomes and manikin outcomes were also used to evaluate the effectiveness of the crisis checklists on provider behaviours and patient outcomes.

resultsOverall self-confidence and self-confidence related to skills and knowledge while not significant demonstrated clinically relevant improvements that were sustained over time. Perceptions of the checklists were positive with consistent utilisation sustained over time. More importantly, use of the checklists demonstrated a reduction in errors both in the simulated and clinical setting.

conclusionRecommendations from this study consist of key considerations for development and implementation of checklists including: utilisation of stakeholders in the development phase; implementation in real and simulated environments; and ongoing reinforcement and training to sustain use.

Indexed as

crisis checklistsintensive care unitlow frequency high risk patient eventspatient safetyrepetitive simulation

Identifiers

PMID35518377
PMCPMC8936617
OpenAlexW2912785996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.