Surgical Safety Checklist ComplianceNCT03252860
WHO SSC : Compliance and Associated Surgical Outcomes in Uganda's Referral Hospitals
An observational study of Surgical Safety Checklist Compliance and Perioperative Surgical Adverse Events, run by Makerere University.
Trial summary
The investigators set out to determine the extent of compliance with the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist and the association of this compliance with perioperative surgical outcomes in five of Uganda's referral hospitals. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 1 day to 100 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Surgical Safety Checklist Compliance, Perioperative Surgical Adverse Events
- What is being tested?
- Observation of compliance with the World Health Organisation Surgical Safety Checklist
- How many people
- 850 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Apr 2016to 12 Aug 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 1 day to 100 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: All patients undergoing surgical operations in 5 of Uganda's referral hospitals over a 4-month period.
Who may be able to join
- Surgical operations being performed in the participating hospitals whose directors consented to be part of the study.
Who cannot join
- Surgical operations performed in hospitals whose directors declined to consent to be part of study.
About this study
Official title: World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist: Compliance and Associated Surgical Outcomes in Uganda's Referral Hospitals
The investigators set out to determine the extent of compliance with the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist and the association of this compliance with perioperative surgical outcomes in five of Uganda's referral hospitals.
Read the detailed description
Multicentre prospective cohort study in five of Uganda's referral Hospitals in Uganda including the referral private not for profit (PNFPs) hospitals.
Target population: Patients undergoing surgery in Uganda's referral hospitals.
Study population: Surgical operations being performed in Uganda's referral hospitals over a 4-month period.
Sampling method
Purposive sampling of the hospitals was done based on their geographical location, their influence in the areas where they are situated and the presence of an anaesthesiologist in the hospital. The surgeries were enrolled into the study by probability proportional to the size sampling. The sampling unit was surgical operations done in the eligible hospitals. Surgical operations were enrolled into the study systematically during the study period.
Sample size:
Primary objective: To determine the extent of compliance to the WHO surgical safety checklist among Uganda's referral hospitals.
The sample size for this objective was calculated using the Modified Kish \& Leslie method (1965)
N= [Z² p (1-p)] / d² where;
Z= is a percentile of the standard normal value determined by the 95% confidence level (1.96).
N= minimum required sample size
d= desired precision for the study = 0.05
p= is the estimated proportion of hospitals that had poor compliance to SSC = 50%
The proportion used to compute the sample size was the proportion of hospitals which had poor compliance to the SSC. This proportion was obtained from the WHO recommendation when no previous proportions are available = 50% n= 384 participants, since the study was done in several hospitals, adjustment for clustering was done by applying a cluster effect of 2.
Sample size = 768
Adjusting for a 10% loss to follow up, N = n (100+10)/100
Sample size = 845
Variables:
The categorical variables included patient demographics, urgency of the surgery, actual use of the WHO SSC, qualification of staff and the team leader present in the operating room during the use of the checklist, the team member who initiated the checklist, timing of the performance of the different domains and post-operative complications within a 24 hour period after the surgery and daily until discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay, while the ordinal variables included percentage of items checked among the 19 parameters and 3 broad domains of the WHO SSC. These variables were ticked off the questionnaire by the research assistant as they observed the surgery. Compliance was expressed as the percentage of items that has been completed per checklist.
Data collection
Data was collected using standardized sheets and stored safely using waterproof boxes and treated with utmost confidence. All patients undergoing surgical operations were recruited into the study regardless of their age, surgical specialty and the urgency of the surgical operation provided consent to participate in the study was given. The research assistant present in the operating room observed the activities in the room and completed a structured questionnaire regarding demographics, the 19 parameters and 3 domains of the WHO SSC, near misses, qualification of the staff present in the operating room, and intraoperative variables. Technical and intraoperative complications were recorded as well. The patients were followed up and questioned on the occurrence of complications at 24 hours and daily until discharge or 30 days post-surgery whichever came first. The nurses on the ward reported any immediate post-operative complications.
The complications were recorded as defined by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database ; Bleeding: overt frank bleeding from the surgical site, heavy soiling of the surgical site dressing with blood or need to change dressing within the first 24 hours due to soiling with blood, respiratory complications; acute airway obstruction, inability to saturate above 92% off oxygen therapy within the first 24 hours after surgery with absence of previous hypoxemia on room air and prolonged intubation, post-operative nausea and vomiting, loss of consciousness or altered consciousness within the first 24 hours after surgery based on GCS scores before and after the surgery, cardiac and hemodynamic complications such as hypotension which were defined as a blood pressure of less than 90/60 mmHg, need for unanticipated blood transfusion intraoperatively and 24 hours postoperatively cardiac arrest, pain and death. The patients were then followed prospectively for any other complications in the perioperative period. Any other occurrences that the ward nurses considered complications attributed to the perioperative period were reported to the research assistants and this was recorded in the questionnaire. The patients exited the study at discharge or at 30 days of in hospital stay.
Checklist compliance was defined as "non compliance" (none of the 19 items checked off), "partial compliance" (at least 1 to 9 items checked off) and "high compliance" (10 to 19 items checked off) and was expressed as a percentage of the number of the expected checked off items.
Data safety
Raw data sources were received from the different hospitals and stored in safe waterproof boxes. An electronic data entry tool was formulated and used to store the data on multiple storage devices.
Data management
Data were double-entered in an entry tool created using Epidata software version 3.1. This had in-built checks. The data were validated and inconsistencies cleared accordingly. The data were backed up and a copy was sent to the data analysis program.
Data analysis
Data were analysed using STATA version 13 (StataCorp.2013.Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP)
Descriptives: Descriptives were summarised using means and standard deviations for the parametric continuous data. Categorical data were summarised using proportions and percentages.
Comparisons: Comparisons for variables between participants with poor and good surgical outcomes were made. For the parametric continuous data, the student t test was used and for the non-parametric data, Mann-Whitney- U test was employed. For the categorical data, the Chi-Square test of Fisher's exact test was used.
Prevalence of compliance was calculated as follows; the numerator was the number of checked off items on the checklist. The denominator was the total number of expected checked off items. We expressed compliance as a percentage completion of the items comprising the checklist. There is a total of 19 items in the checklist, therefore high compliance involved adhering to at least 10 of them while non-compliance involved not adhering to any of the items. We assigned each of the items of the checklist a score of 1 then calculated a percentage of the compliance by dividing the score attained out the 19 which is the expected score. We presented the mean percentage compliances with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals.
Bivariate analysis: Binary logistic regression model was used to assess for association of each of the predictors with mortality while a linear regression model was used to asses for the association with the length of hospital stay
Multivariate analysis: All factors with p value of 0.2 or less at bivariate analysis were simultaneously entered in multivariate linear and logistic regression models respectively. Confounding was assessed for at a 10% or more difference between the unadjusted and adjusted models. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05
Analysed data were presented in figures, tables and text. Results of the linear regression were expressed as coefficient and the ones of logistic regression expressed as OR with a confidence interval of 95%.
- Being tested
- Observation of compliance with the World Health Organisation Surgical Safety Checklist
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Observation of compliance with the World Health Organisation Surgical Safety ChecklistOther
Observation of use and compliance with the surgical safety checklist and associated perioperative surgical outcomes
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Compliance with the WHO surgical safety checklist
number of parameters on the surgical safety checklist actually performed
Measured: immediate
Secondary outcomes (3)
perioperative adverse events
The participants were followed up daily and perioperative adverse events as defined by the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program. The participants were followed up until discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay and the secondary outcome measures entered into a questionnaire.
Measured: time to discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay whichever came first
length of hospital stay
The participants were followed up daily until discharge or 30 days of in patient stay and the length of stay recorded in a questionnaire
Measured: time to discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay whichever came first
all cause mortality
The participants were followed up daily and deaths and the time of their occurrence were recorded in a questionnaire
Measured: from date of recruitment until date of death from any cause assessed up to 3 months of in hospital stay
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Aug 2017
- Study start1 Apr 2016
- Primary completion31 Jul 2016
- Study completion12 Aug 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Surgical Safety Checklist ComplianceStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 850 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Makerere University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03252860
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- WHO SSC Compliance Uganda
- Status last verified
- Aug 2017
- First submitted
- 12 Jul 2017
- Last updated
- 17 Aug 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Igaga EN, Sendagire C, Kizito S, Obua D, Kwizera A. World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist: Compliance and Associated Surgical Outcomes in Uganda's Referral Hospitals. Anesth Analg. 2018 Dec;127(6):1427-1433. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003672.
PubMed 30059396
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Aug 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist: Compliance and Associated Surgical Outcomes in Uganda's Referral Hospitals
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03252860
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- WHO SSC Compliance Uganda
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 850 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Makerere UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Apr 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jul 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- 12 Aug 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Aug 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The investigators set out to determine the extent of compliance with the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist and the association of this compliance with perioperative surgical outcomes in five of Uganda's referral hospitals.
Detailed description
Multicentre prospective cohort study in five of Uganda's referral Hospitals in Uganda including the referral private not for profit (PNFPs) hospitals.
Target population: Patients undergoing surgery in Uganda's referral hospitals.
Study population: Surgical operations being performed in Uganda's referral hospitals over a 4-month period.
Sampling method
Purposive sampling of the hospitals was done based on their geographical location, their influence in the areas where they are situated and the presence of an anaesthesiologist in the hospital. The surgeries were enrolled into the study by probability proportional to the size sampling. The sampling unit was surgical operations done in the eligible hospitals. Surgical operations were enrolled into the study systematically during the study period.
Sample size:
Primary objective: To determine the extent of compliance to the WHO surgical safety checklist among Uganda's referral hospitals.
The sample size for this objective was calculated using the Modified Kish \& Leslie method (1965)
N= [Z² p (1-p)] / d² where;
Z= is a percentile of the standard normal value determined by the 95% confidence level (1.96).
N= minimum required sample size
d= desired precision for the study = 0.05
p= is the estimated proportion of hospitals that had poor compliance to SSC = 50%
The proportion used to compute the sample size was the proportion of hospitals which had poor compliance to the SSC. This proportion was obtained from the WHO recommendation when no previous proportions are available = 50% n= 384 participants, since the study was done in several hospitals, adjustment for clustering was done by applying a cluster effect of 2.
Sample size = 768
Adjusting for a 10% loss to follow up, N = n (100+10)/100
Sample size = 845
Variables:
The categorical variables included patient demographics, urgency of the surgery, actual use of the WHO SSC, qualification of staff and the team leader present in the operating room during the use of the checklist, the team member who initiated the checklist, timing of the performance of the different domains and post-operative complications within a 24 hour period after the surgery and daily until discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay, while the ordinal variables included percentage of items checked among the 19 parameters and 3 broad domains of the WHO SSC. These variables were ticked off the questionnaire by the research assistant as they observed the surgery. Compliance was expressed as the percentage of items that has been completed per checklist.
Data collection
Data was collected using standardized sheets and stored safely using waterproof boxes and treated with utmost confidence. All patients undergoing surgical operations were recruited into the study regardless of their age, surgical specialty and the urgency of the surgical operation provided consent to participate in the study was given. The research assistant present in the operating room observed the activities in the room and completed a structured questionnaire regarding demographics, the 19 parameters and 3 domains of the WHO SSC, near misses, qualification of the staff present in the operating room, and intraoperative variables. Technical and intraoperative complications were recorded as well. The patients were followed up and questioned on the occurrence of complications at 24 hours and daily until discharge or 30 days post-surgery whichever came first. The nurses on the ward reported any immediate post-operative complications.
The complications were recorded as defined by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database ; Bleeding: overt frank bleeding from the surgical site, heavy soiling of the surgical site dressing with blood or need to change dressing within the first 24 hours due to soiling with blood, respiratory complications; acute airway obstruction, inability to saturate above 92% off oxygen therapy within the first 24 hours after surgery with absence of previous hypoxemia on room air and prolonged intubation, post-operative nausea and vomiting, loss of consciousness or altered consciousness within the first 24 hours after surgery based on GCS scores before and after the surgery, cardiac and hemodynamic complications such as hypotension which were defined as a blood pressure of less than 90/60 mmHg, need for unanticipated blood transfusion intraoperatively and 24 hours postoperatively cardiac arrest, pain and death. The patients were then followed prospectively for any other complications in the perioperative period. Any other occurrences that the ward nurses considered complications attributed to the perioperative period were reported to the research assistants and this was recorded in the questionnaire. The patients exited the study at discharge or at 30 days of in hospital stay.
Checklist compliance was defined as "non compliance" (none of the 19 items checked off), "partial compliance" (at least 1 to 9 items checked off) and "high compliance" (10 to 19 items checked off) and was expressed as a percentage of the number of the expected checked off items.
Data safety
Raw data sources were received from the different hospitals and stored in safe waterproof boxes. An electronic data entry tool was formulated and used to store the data on multiple storage devices.
Data management
Data were double-entered in an entry tool created using Epidata software version 3.1. This had in-built checks. The data were validated and inconsistencies cleared accordingly. The data were backed up and a copy was sent to the data analysis program.
Data analysis
Data were analysed using STATA version 13 (StataCorp.2013.Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP)
Descriptives: Descriptives were summarised using means and standard deviations for the parametric continuous data. Categorical data were summarised using proportions and percentages.
Comparisons: Comparisons for variables between participants with poor and good surgical outcomes were made. For the parametric continuous data, the student t test was used and for the non-parametric data, Mann-Whitney- U test was employed. For the categorical data, the Chi-Square test of Fisher's exact test was used.
Prevalence of compliance was calculated as follows; the numerator was the number of checked off items on the checklist. The denominator was the total number of expected checked off items. We expressed compliance as a percentage completion of the items comprising the checklist. There is a total of 19 items in the checklist, therefore high compliance involved adhering to at least 10 of them while non-compliance involved not adhering to any of the items. We assigned each of the items of the checklist a score of 1 then calculated a percentage of the compliance by dividing the score attained out the 19 which is the expected score. We presented the mean percentage compliances with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals.
Bivariate analysis: Binary logistic regression model was used to assess for association of each of the predictors with mortality while a linear regression model was used to asses for the association with the length of hospital stay
Multivariate analysis: All factors with p value of 0.2 or less at bivariate analysis were simultaneously entered in multivariate linear and logistic regression models respectively. Confounding was assessed for at a 10% or more difference between the unadjusted and adjusted models. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05
Analysed data were presented in figures, tables and text. Results of the linear regression were expressed as coefficient and the ones of logistic regression expressed as OR with a confidence interval of 95%.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 1 day to 100 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- All patients undergoing surgical operations in 5 of Uganda's referral hospitals over a 4-month period.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Surgical operations being performed in the participating hospitals whose directors consented to be part of the study.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Surgical operations performed in hospitals whose directors declined to consent to be part of study.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Observation of compliance with the World Health Organisation Surgical Safety ChecklistObservation of use and compliance with the surgical safety checklist and associated perioperative surgical outcomes | Other | – |
Primary outcome
Compliance with the WHO surgical safety checklist
Time frame: immediate
number of parameters on the surgical safety checklist actually performed
3 secondary outcomes
perioperative adverse events
Time frame: time to discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay whichever came first
length of hospital stay
Time frame: time to discharge or 30 days of in hospital stay whichever came first
all cause mortality
Time frame: from date of recruitment until date of death from any cause assessed up to 3 months of in hospital stay
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Aug 2017.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30059396Igaga EN, Sendagire C, Kizito S, Obua D, Kwizera A. World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist: Compliance and Associated Surgical Outcomes in Uganda's Referral Hospitals. Anesth Analg. 2018 Dec;127(6):1427-1433. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003672.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Surgical Safety Checklist Compliance and Perioperative Surgical Adverse Events, run by Makerere University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Aug 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Compliance with the WHO surgical safety checklist (time frame: immediate). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03252860, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Aug 2017; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.