Cureus · 2025
Implementation of a Standardized Surgical Operative Note: A Clinical Audit at Atbara Teaching Hospital.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Muhammed Abubakr, Awad Mustafa, Taha Mawada, Mohammed Ali Shorouq, Mohamed Alameen Moaid Abdallah, Musa Mohamed Zainab Hussein, Hamad Mohamednour Mohamed Kamalaldein, Mohamed Israa Isam, Ali Yousif Ahmed Shakir, Mubarak Abdullah Ola Atif, Mohamed Ali Muayad Mubarak, Suliman Mohamed Ashraf Mohamed, Mahadi Babiker Ahmed Yahia, Saeed Majzoub Abdalgader Omer, Sailh Omer Mohammed Abd Elgaioum, Ahmed Mohajer Abdulmonem Mohamed, Elsheikh Ahmed Mohammed Salaheldin, Fadalla Tagwa, Yousif Abdulhadi Shereen Abdelmoniem, Mohamed Mustafa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIM: High-quality surgical operation notes are essential for patient safety, clinical communication, and medicolegal accountability. In low-resource settings like Sudan, inconsistent and incomplete documentation remains a challenge. This study aimed to evaluate and improve the quality of surgical operation notes at the Atbara Teaching Hospital using a closed-loop clinical audit.
METHODS: A two-cycle audit was conducted using a standardized checklist based on the guidelines of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Fifty surgical notes were reviewed in each cycle. Following the baseline assessment, interventions including the implementation of a structured proforma and staff education sessions were introduced. A re-audit was then performed to assess the impact of these measures.
RESULTS: Significant improvements were observed across most documentation parameters. Patient identification improved from 2% to 100% (p<0.0001), preoperative diagnosis from 8% to 93.5% (p<0.0001), and postoperative care instructions from 0% to 76.1% (p<0.0001). Documentation of anticipated blood loss, antibiotic prophylaxis, and closure techniques also showed statistically significant enhancements. However, gaps remained in areas, such as complication reporting and anesthetist details.
CONCLUSION: Structured interventions, including standardized templates and targeted training, substantially improved the completeness and quality of surgical operation notes. Ongoing audits, reinforced education, and potential integration of electronic records are recommended to sustain and build upon these improvements, particularly in resource-limited settings.
METHODS: A two-cycle audit was conducted using a standardized checklist based on the guidelines of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Fifty surgical notes were reviewed in each cycle. Following the baseline assessment, interventions including the implementation of a structured proforma and staff education sessions were introduced. A re-audit was then performed to assess the impact of these measures.
RESULTS: Significant improvements were observed across most documentation parameters. Patient identification improved from 2% to 100% (p<0.0001), preoperative diagnosis from 8% to 93.5% (p<0.0001), and postoperative care instructions from 0% to 76.1% (p<0.0001). Documentation of anticipated blood loss, antibiotic prophylaxis, and closure techniques also showed statistically significant enhancements. However, gaps remained in areas, such as complication reporting and anesthetist details.
CONCLUSION: Structured interventions, including standardized templates and targeted training, substantially improved the completeness and quality of surgical operation notes. Ongoing audits, reinforced education, and potential integration of electronic records are recommended to sustain and build upon these improvements, particularly in resource-limited settings.