↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Unlocking the “black box” of practice improvement strategies to implement surgical safety checklists: a process evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
Unlocking the “black box” of practice improvement strategies to implement surgical safety checklists: a process evaluation
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, April 2017
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s124298
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brigid M Gillespie, Kyra Hamilton, Dianne Ball, Joanne Lavin, Therese Gardiner, Teresa K Withers, Andrea P Marshall, Teresa Withers, Andrea P. Marshall

Abstract

Compliance with surgical safety checklists (SSCs) has been associated with improvements in clinical processes such as antibiotic use, correct site marking, and overall safety processes. Yet, proper execution has been difficult to achieve. The objective of this study was to undertake a process evaluation of four knowledge translation (KT) strategies used to implement the Pass the Baton (PTB) intervention which was designed to improve utilization of the SSC. As part of the process evaluation, a logic model was generated to explain which KT strategies worked well (or less well) in the operating rooms of a tertiary referral hospital in Queensland, Australia. The KT strategies implemented included change champions/opinion leaders, education, audit and feedback, and reminders. In evaluating the implementation of these strategies, this study considered context, intervention and underpinning assumptions, implementation, and mechanism of impact. Observational and interview data were collected to assess implementation of the KT strategies relative to fidelity, feasibility, and acceptability. Findings from 35 structured observations and 15 interviews with 96 intervention participants suggest that all of the KT strategies were consistently implemented. Of the 220 staff working in the department, that is, nurses, anesthetists, and surgeons, 160 (72.7%) knew about the PTB strategies. Qualitative analysis revealed that implementation was generally feasible and acceptable. A barrier to feasibility was physician engagement. An impediment to acceptability was participants' skepticism about the ability of the KT strategies to effect behavioral change. Overall, results of this evaluation suggest that success of implementation was moderate. Given the probable impact of contextual factors, that is, team culture and the characteristics of participants, the KT strategies may need modification prior to widespread implementation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Librarian 5 7%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 24%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#4,372,554
of 9,724,738 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#97
of 254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,815
of 263,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,724,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 54th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,160 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.