How Much and What Local Adaptation Is Acceptable? A Comparison of 24 Surgical Safety Checklists in Switzerland

In 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist, and 3 years later, the Swiss Patient Safety Foundation adapted it for Switzerland. Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews showed ambiguous results on the effectiveness of surgical checklists. Most of them assume that the study checklists are almost identical, but in fact they are quite heterogeneous due to adaptations to local settings. This study aims to investigate the extent to which the checklists currently used in Switzerland differ and to discuss the consequences of local adaptations. METHODS: For the analysis, 24 checklists used in 18 Swiss hospitals are analyzed. First, general checklist characteristics are examined. Second, the checklist items are compared with the checklist items of the WHO and the Swiss Patient Safety Foundation. RESULTS: The checklists contain a median of 34.5 items (range, 15–76). Compared with the checklists of WHO and Patient Safety Switzerland, which contain 12 and 21 process checks and 10 and 9 conversation prompts, respectively, the study checklists contain a median of 15.5 process checks (range, 3–25) and a median of 4 conversation prompts (range, 0–10). CONCLUSIONS: There are major differences between the study checklists and the reference checklists that raise doubts about the comparability of checklists. More resources must be invested in proper checklist adaptions and better guidance on how to adapt safety tools such as the surgical safety checklist needed to local conditions. In any case, details of the checklists used need to be clearly described in studies on checklist effectiveness.