TY - JOUR
T1 - Perioperative patient safety recommendations
T2 - systematic review of clinical practice guidelines
AU - SAFEST Consortium
AU - Martinez-Nicolas, Ismael
AU - Arnal-Velasco, Daniel
AU - Romero-García, Eva
AU - Fabregas, Neus
AU - Otero, Yolanda Sanduende
AU - Leon, Irene
AU - Bartakke, Ashish A.
AU - Silva-Garcia, Javier
AU - Rodriguez, Anna
AU - Valli, Claudia
AU - Zamarian, Sandro
AU - Zaludek, Adam
AU - Meneses-Echavez, Jose
AU - Loaiza-Betancur, Andrés F.
AU - Sousa, Paulo
AU - Orrego, Carola
AU - Soria-Aledo, Victor
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was funded by the European Union Horizon Europe Framework Programme under grant agreement No. 101057825. No other funding sources were received for this study. The authors wish to thank Eulalia Grifol Clar (Head of the Medical Library, Hospital Universitario Fundaci\u00F3n Alcorc\u00F3n) and Noelia \u00C1lvarez D\u00EDaz (Head of the Medical Library, Hospital Universitario Ram\u00F3n y Cajal) for conducting a literature search and Azahara Rodr\u00EDguez-Luna for the initial development of the protocol of this study.
Funding Information:
This work was funded by the European Union Horizon Europe Framework Programme under grant agreement No. 101057825. No other funding sources were received for this study. Acknowledgements
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/12/1
Y1 - 2024/12/1
N2 - Background: Surgical-related incidents are a common cause of in-hospital adverse events. Surgical patient safety would benefit from evidence-based practices, but a comprehensive collection of patient safety recommendations is still lacking. This study aimed to compile and assess the perioperative patient safety recommendations for adults. Method: A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines was conducted using Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, and Trip Database from 2012 to 2022. Eligibility criteria followed a PICAR strategy for patient safety recommendations in the perioperative care continuum. Guidelines were appraised for quality, particularly focusing on the ‘rigour of development’ domain of the AGREE-II tool for those containing strong recommendations. Descriptive analyses were conducted, emphasizing guideline quality, recommendation strength, and the supporting level of evidence. Results: From the 267 guidelines, 4666 perioperative patient safety recommendations were extracted, of which 44.9% (2095) were strongly recommended. Of these, 322 had the highest level of evidence, but only 18 guidelines met high standards in the AGREE-II ‘rigour of development’ domain. A subset of 78 recommendations ranked the highest in the strength of recommendation, level of evidence, and rigour of development of their guidelines. A gap was found within pre-admission and post-discharge care recommendations. Discussion: This review highlights the noteworthy variability in the methodological quality of the guidelines, and a discordance between strength of recommendation and evidence level of the available perioperative patient safety recommendations. These findings provide valuable information for advising policy decisions and promoting best practices to enhance global surgical safety.
AB - Background: Surgical-related incidents are a common cause of in-hospital adverse events. Surgical patient safety would benefit from evidence-based practices, but a comprehensive collection of patient safety recommendations is still lacking. This study aimed to compile and assess the perioperative patient safety recommendations for adults. Method: A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines was conducted using Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, and Trip Database from 2012 to 2022. Eligibility criteria followed a PICAR strategy for patient safety recommendations in the perioperative care continuum. Guidelines were appraised for quality, particularly focusing on the ‘rigour of development’ domain of the AGREE-II tool for those containing strong recommendations. Descriptive analyses were conducted, emphasizing guideline quality, recommendation strength, and the supporting level of evidence. Results: From the 267 guidelines, 4666 perioperative patient safety recommendations were extracted, of which 44.9% (2095) were strongly recommended. Of these, 322 had the highest level of evidence, but only 18 guidelines met high standards in the AGREE-II ‘rigour of development’ domain. A subset of 78 recommendations ranked the highest in the strength of recommendation, level of evidence, and rigour of development of their guidelines. A gap was found within pre-admission and post-discharge care recommendations. Discussion: This review highlights the noteworthy variability in the methodological quality of the guidelines, and a discordance between strength of recommendation and evidence level of the available perioperative patient safety recommendations. These findings provide valuable information for advising policy decisions and promoting best practices to enhance global surgical safety.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85211996076&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae143
DO - 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae143
M3 - Review article
C2 - 39661325
AN - SCOPUS:85211996076
SN - 2474-9842
VL - 8
JO - BJS Open
JF - BJS Open
IS - 6
M1 - zrae143
ER -