Quality of process records in the surgical area and possible consequences for patient safety
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23938/ASSN.1120Keywords:
Clinical registries, Underregistration, Major Surgery, Patient Safety, Quality ImprovementAbstract
Background. The objective is to detect defects in the completion of surgical records (omissions/illegibility), assess their severity and potential consequences, and design improvement strategies.
Methods. The clinical records of nursing and anaesthesia (paper-based) and surgical records (electronic) for major surgical procedures performed over a three-month period at Martorell Hospital (Spain) were reviewed. Deficiencies (omissions and illegibility) were identified, and variables with completion deficiencies in more than 50% of the records or with potential impact on patient safety were selected. A panel of experts used a questionnaire to assess severity (high = 70-89%, very high = >90%) and possible consequences (pre-, intra-, post-surgical, and administrative), and proposed for improvement measures.
Results. Medical records from 491 patients were analysed. Illegibility was almost non-existent, except for four variables (≤10%). The overall completion rate was 98%. Forty-three variables with defects in >50% of records or with potential impact were included in the questionnaire, which was sent to 29 experts. The reliability of their responses was very high (α=0.995; intraclass correlation coefficients: individual=0.880 and average=0.995). Omissions of nearly all variables were considered of high or very high severity, with postoperative consequences outweighing intraoperative ones. Face-to-face team training and record adaptation were the most frequently recommended improvement strategies.
Conclusions. Surgical records show serious to very serious omissions with potential postoperative consequences for patient safety. Simulation-based training was considered the most effective tool for improvement.
Downloads
References
1. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. To err is human: Building a safer health system. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2000. https://doi.org/10.17226/9728
2. FRANCO VEGA MC, AISS MA, GEORGE M, DAY L, MBADUGHA,A, OWENS K et al. Enhancing implementation of the I-PASS handoff tool using a provider handoff task force at a comprehensive cancer center. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2024; 50(8): 560-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2024.03.004
3. BALLESTER ROCA M. ¿Estamos abordando el problema de la seguridad del paciente en los hospitales desde la perspectiva correcta? Folia Humanistica 2020; 2(1): 1-22. http://doi.org/10.30860/0060
4. BERNIA JA, ROURE C, BROTO A. Prevención de errores de medicación en paciente quirúrgico. Boletín de prevención de errores de medicación de Cataluña 2013; 11(2): 1-8. https://scientiasalut.gencat.cat/bitstream/handle/11351/1963/butll_prev_errors_medicacio_catalunya%20_2013_11_02_cas.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
5. PELÁEZ R, AGUILAR JL, SEGURA C, FERNÁNDEZ S, MENDIOLA MA, FORNER JC. Experiencia de un equipo interdisciplinar de Anestesiología y Enfermería en un circuito de anestesia fuera de quirófano. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 2009; 56(2): 92-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-9356(09)70338-X
6. SAARINEN I, MALMIVAARA A, MIIKKI R, KAIPIA A. Systematic review of hospital-wide complication registries. BJS Open 2018; 2(5): 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.87
7. Medical Protection. Medical records: uses. Consultado el 16 de agosto de 2025. https://www.medicalprotection.org/uk/guidance/medical-records#uses
8. SCARPIS E, BRUNELLI L, TRICARICO P, POLETTO M, PANZERA A, LONDERO C et al. How to assure the quality of clinical records? A 7-year experience in a large academic hospital. Plos One 2021;16(12): e0261018. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261018
9. National Health Service. Health Education England. Record keeping - the consequences of recording/documenting patient information incorrectly. https://london.hee.nhs.uk/record-keeping-consequences-recordingdocumenting-patient-information-incorrectly
10. HAYNES AB, WEISER TG, BERRY WR, LIPSITZ SR, BREIZAT AH, DELLINGER EP et al, Safe Surgery Saves Lives Study Group. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 2009; 360(5): 491-499. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa0810119
11. EVANS SM, SCOTT IA, JOHNSON NP, CAMERON PA, McNeil JJ. Development of clinical-quality registries in Australia: the way forward. Med J Aust 2011; 1: 360-363. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377. 2011.tb03007
12. LEE P, CHIN K, LIEW D, STUB D, BRENNAN AL, LEFKOVITS J et al. Economic evaluation of clinical quality registries: A systematic review. BMJ Open 2019; 9(12): e030984. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030984
13. Gobierno de España. Ministerio de Sanidad. Seguridad del paciente. Programa de seguridad en el bloque quirúrgico. https://seguridaddelpaciente.sanidad.gob.es/practicasSeguras/seguridadBloqueQuirurgico/home.htm
14. Servei Català de la Salut CatSalut. PREVINQCAT. https://catsalut.gencat.cat/web/.content/minisite/vincat/programa/PREVINQ-CAT/PREVINQ-CAT.pdf
15. KHURSHID Z, DE BRÚN A, MARTIN J, MCAULIFFE E. A systematic review and narrative synthesis: Determinants of the effectiveness and sustainability of measurement-focused quality improvement trainings. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2021; 41(3): 210-220. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000331.
16. FIALLOS S. Simulación clínica en la formación de profesionales de la salud: explorando beneficios y desafíos. Revista Científica de Salud y Desarrollo Humano 2024; 5: 116-29. https://doi.org/10.61368/r.s.d.h.v5i2.124
17. STEY AM, RUSSELL MM, KO CY, SACKS GD, DAWES AJ, GIBBONS MM. Clinical registries and quality measurement in surgery: a systematic review. Surgery 2015; 157(2): 381-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.08.097
18. VAN DER VEER SN, DE KEIZER NF, RAVELLI ACJ, TENKINK S, JAGER KJ. Improving the quality of care. A systematic review of how medical registries provide information feedback to health care providers. Int J Med Inform 2010; 79(5): 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2010.01.011
19. HOQUE DME, KUMARI V, HOQUE M, RUSECKAITE R, ROMERO L, EVANS SM. Impact of clinical registries on quality of patient care and clinical outcomes: A systematic review. Plos One 8; 12(9): e0183667. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183667
20. Gobierno de España. Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad. Estrategia de Seguridad del Paciente del Sistema Nacional de Salud Período 2015-2020. https://seguridaddelpaciente.sanidad.gob.es/docs/Estrategia_Seguridad_del_Paciente_2015-2020.pdf
21. Gobierno de España. Ministerio de Sanidad, Política Social e Igualdad. Guía de Práctica Clínica para la Seguridad del Paciente Quirúrgico. 2010. https://portal.guiasalud.es/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/GPC_478_Seguridad_Paciente_AIAQS_compl.pdf
22. ORTEGA VARGAS C, QUINTERO BARRIOS MM, SUÁREZ VÁZQUEZ MG, SOLÍS PÉREZ MT, JIMÉNEZ Y VILLEGAS MC, ZÁRATE GRAJALES RA et al. Manual de evaluación de la calidad del servicio de enfermería. Estrategias para su aplicación. Ciudad de México: Editorial Médica Panamericana; 2014.
23. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence NICE. Clinical guideline [CG65]. Hypothermia: prevention and management in adults having surgery. 2008 cg65 (actualizada el 14 de diciembre de 2016). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/
24. KANDASWAMY S, HETTINGER AZ, HOFFMAN DJ, RATWANI RM, MARQUARD J. Communication through the electronic health record: frequency and implications of free text orders. JAMIA Open 2020; 3(2): 154-159. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaa020
25. Gobierno de España. Agencia de Calidad del Sistema Nacional de Salud. Conjunto Mínimo de Datos en los Informes Clinicos. Historia Clínica Digital en el Sistema Nacional de Salud. 2008. https://www.sanidad.gob.es/organizacion/sns/planCalidadSNS/docs/CMDIC.pdf
26. WRIGHT A, MCGLINCHEY EA, POON EG, JENTER CA, BATES DW, SIMON SR. Ability to generate patient registries among practices with and without electronic health records. J Med Internet Res 2009; 11(3): e31. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1166
• 27. ROSENBAUM BP, LORENZ RR, LUTHER RB, KNOWLES-WARD L, KELLY DL, WEIL RJ. Improving and measuring inpatient documentation of medical care within the MS-DRG system: Education, monitoring, and normalized case mix index. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2014; 11(Summer): 1c. PMID: 25214820
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
La revista Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra es publicada por el Departamento de Salud del Gobierno de Navarra (España), quien conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright ) sobre el artículo publicado y favorece y permite la difusión del mismo bajo licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-SA 4.0). Esta licencia permite copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente el artículo, siempre que siempre que se cite la autoría y la publicación inicial en Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, y se distinga la existencia de esta licencia de uso.
