Cargando…

Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation

Introduction. The Royal College of Surgeons in England published guidelines in 2008 outlining the information that should be documented at each surgery. St. James's Hospital uses a standard operation sheet for all surgical procedures and these were examined to assess documentation standards. Ob...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coughlan, Fionn, Ellanti, Prasad, Ní Fhoghlu, Cliodhna, Moriarity, Andrew, Hogan, Niall
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4556872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26357669
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/782720
_version_ 1782388412538421248
author Coughlan, Fionn
Ellanti, Prasad
Ní Fhoghlu, Cliodhna
Moriarity, Andrew
Hogan, Niall
author_facet Coughlan, Fionn
Ellanti, Prasad
Ní Fhoghlu, Cliodhna
Moriarity, Andrew
Hogan, Niall
author_sort Coughlan, Fionn
collection PubMed
description Introduction. The Royal College of Surgeons in England published guidelines in 2008 outlining the information that should be documented at each surgery. St. James's Hospital uses a standard operation sheet for all surgical procedures and these were examined to assess documentation standards. Objectives. To retrospectively audit the hand written orthopaedic operative notes according to established guidelines. Methods. A total of 63 operation notes over seven months were audited in terms of date and time of surgery, surgeon, procedure, elective or emergency indication, operative diagnosis, incision details, signature, closure details, tourniquet time, postop instructions, complications, prosthesis, and serial numbers. Results. A consultant performed 71.4% of procedures; however, 85.7% of the operative notes were written by the registrar. The date and time of surgery, name of surgeon, procedure name, and signature were documented in all cases. The operative diagnosis and postoperative instructions were frequently not documented in the designated location. Incision details were included in 81.7% and prosthesis details in only 30% while the tourniquet time was not documented in any. Conclusion. Completion and documentation of operative procedures were excellent in some areas; improvement is needed in documenting tourniquet time, prosthesis and incision details, and the location of operative diagnosis and postoperative instructions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4556872
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45568722015-09-09 Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation Coughlan, Fionn Ellanti, Prasad Ní Fhoghlu, Cliodhna Moriarity, Andrew Hogan, Niall Surg Res Pract Research Article Introduction. The Royal College of Surgeons in England published guidelines in 2008 outlining the information that should be documented at each surgery. St. James's Hospital uses a standard operation sheet for all surgical procedures and these were examined to assess documentation standards. Objectives. To retrospectively audit the hand written orthopaedic operative notes according to established guidelines. Methods. A total of 63 operation notes over seven months were audited in terms of date and time of surgery, surgeon, procedure, elective or emergency indication, operative diagnosis, incision details, signature, closure details, tourniquet time, postop instructions, complications, prosthesis, and serial numbers. Results. A consultant performed 71.4% of procedures; however, 85.7% of the operative notes were written by the registrar. The date and time of surgery, name of surgeon, procedure name, and signature were documented in all cases. The operative diagnosis and postoperative instructions were frequently not documented in the designated location. Incision details were included in 81.7% and prosthesis details in only 30% while the tourniquet time was not documented in any. Conclusion. Completion and documentation of operative procedures were excellent in some areas; improvement is needed in documenting tourniquet time, prosthesis and incision details, and the location of operative diagnosis and postoperative instructions. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4556872/ /pubmed/26357669 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/782720 Text en Copyright © 2015 Fionn Coughlan et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Coughlan, Fionn
Ellanti, Prasad
Ní Fhoghlu, Cliodhna
Moriarity, Andrew
Hogan, Niall
Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation
title Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation
title_full Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation
title_fullStr Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation
title_full_unstemmed Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation
title_short Audit of Orthopaedic Surgical Documentation
title_sort audit of orthopaedic surgical documentation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4556872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26357669
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/782720
work_keys_str_mv AT coughlanfionn auditoforthopaedicsurgicaldocumentation
AT ellantiprasad auditoforthopaedicsurgicaldocumentation
AT nifhoghlucliodhna auditoforthopaedicsurgicaldocumentation
AT moriarityandrew auditoforthopaedicsurgicaldocumentation
AT hoganniall auditoforthopaedicsurgicaldocumentation