Cargando…

Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop

INTRODUCTION: The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) published Good Surgical Practice guidelines in 2008 and revised them in 2014. They outline the basic standard that all surgical operation notes should meet. OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively audit 57 typed orthopaedic operation notes from St. James’s Ho...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coughlan, Fionn, Ellanti, Prasad, Moriarty, Andrew, McAuley, Nuala, Hogan, Niall
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384846/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28405534
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1084
_version_ 1782520509686087680
author Coughlan, Fionn
Ellanti, Prasad
Moriarty, Andrew
McAuley, Nuala
Hogan, Niall
author_facet Coughlan, Fionn
Ellanti, Prasad
Moriarty, Andrew
McAuley, Nuala
Hogan, Niall
author_sort Coughlan, Fionn
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) published Good Surgical Practice guidelines in 2008 and revised them in 2014. They outline the basic standard that all surgical operation notes should meet. OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively audit 57 typed orthopaedic operation notes from St. James’s Hospital in Dublin (from August to November 2015) against the RCS Good Surgical Practice guidelines published in 2014. They were then compared with the department’s previous audit of handwritten notes to complete the audit loop. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 orthopaedic operation notes were audited by a single reviewer. They were prospectively collected between August and November 2015. All notes were typed on the standard St. James’s Hospital operation note proforma. RESULTS: Of the surgeries, 89.5% were emergencies with 77.2% of them being performed by trainees. All of the operation notes were typed and signed by trainees. The procedure name, incision and closure details, tourniquet time (when relevant), and postoperative instructions were documented in 100% of the notes. In total, 80.7% had an operative diagnosis included while only 26.9% of the documentation had prosthesis serial numbers. All of the typed notes were deemed to be legible. CONCLUSION: The use of printed operation notes allows for improved legibility when compared to typed notes. Documentation standards remained very high in the same areas as the handwritten notes and a marked improvement was seen in areas that had been poorly documented.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5384846
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53848462017-04-12 Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop Coughlan, Fionn Ellanti, Prasad Moriarty, Andrew McAuley, Nuala Hogan, Niall Cureus Quality Improvement INTRODUCTION: The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) published Good Surgical Practice guidelines in 2008 and revised them in 2014. They outline the basic standard that all surgical operation notes should meet. OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively audit 57 typed orthopaedic operation notes from St. James’s Hospital in Dublin (from August to November 2015) against the RCS Good Surgical Practice guidelines published in 2014. They were then compared with the department’s previous audit of handwritten notes to complete the audit loop. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 orthopaedic operation notes were audited by a single reviewer. They were prospectively collected between August and November 2015. All notes were typed on the standard St. James’s Hospital operation note proforma. RESULTS: Of the surgeries, 89.5% were emergencies with 77.2% of them being performed by trainees. All of the operation notes were typed and signed by trainees. The procedure name, incision and closure details, tourniquet time (when relevant), and postoperative instructions were documented in 100% of the notes. In total, 80.7% had an operative diagnosis included while only 26.9% of the documentation had prosthesis serial numbers. All of the typed notes were deemed to be legible. CONCLUSION: The use of printed operation notes allows for improved legibility when compared to typed notes. Documentation standards remained very high in the same areas as the handwritten notes and a marked improvement was seen in areas that had been poorly documented. Cureus 2017-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5384846/ /pubmed/28405534 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1084 Text en Copyright © 2017, Coughlan et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Quality Improvement
Coughlan, Fionn
Ellanti, Prasad
Moriarty, Andrew
McAuley, Nuala
Hogan, Niall
Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop
title Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop
title_full Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop
title_fullStr Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop
title_full_unstemmed Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop
title_short Improving the Standard of Orthopaedic Operation Documentation Using Typed Proforma Operation Notes: A Completed Audit Loop
title_sort improving the standard of orthopaedic operation documentation using typed proforma operation notes: a completed audit loop
topic Quality Improvement
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384846/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28405534
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1084
work_keys_str_mv AT coughlanfionn improvingthestandardoforthopaedicoperationdocumentationusingtypedproformaoperationnotesacompletedauditloop
AT ellantiprasad improvingthestandardoforthopaedicoperationdocumentationusingtypedproformaoperationnotesacompletedauditloop
AT moriartyandrew improvingthestandardoforthopaedicoperationdocumentationusingtypedproformaoperationnotesacompletedauditloop
AT mcauleynuala improvingthestandardoforthopaedicoperationdocumentationusingtypedproformaoperationnotesacompletedauditloop
AT hoganniall improvingthestandardoforthopaedicoperationdocumentationusingtypedproformaoperationnotesacompletedauditloop