Abstract
BackgroundSurgical mortality audit is an important tool for quality assurance and professional development but little is known about the impact of such activity on professional practice at the individual surgeon level. This paper reports the findings of a survey conducted with a self-selected cohort of surgeons in Queensland, Australia, on their experience of participating in the audit and its impact on their professional practice, as well as implications for hospital systems.MethodsThe study used a descriptive cross-sectional survey design. All surgeons registered in Queensland in 2015 (n = 919) were invited to complete an anonymous online questionnaire between September and October 2015. 184 surgeons completed and returned the questionnaire at a response rate of 20%.ResultsThirty-nine percent of the participants reported that involvement in the audit process affected their clinical practice. This was particularly the case for surgeons whose participation included being an assessor. Thirteen percent of the participants had perceived improvement to hospital practices or advancement in patient care and safety as a result of audit recommendations. Analysis of the open-ended responses suggested the audit experience had led surgeons to become more cautious, reflective in action and with increased confidence in best practice, and recognise the importance of effective communication and clear documentation.ConclusionsThis is the first study to examine the impact of participation in a mortality audit process on the professional practice of surgeons. The findings offer evidence for surgical mortality audit as an effective strategy for continuous professional development and for improving patient safety initiatives.
Highlights
Surgical mortality audit is an important tool for quality assurance and professional development but little is known about the impact of such activity on professional practice at the individual surgeon level
Even though surgical mortality audit is an important tool for quality assurance and professional development
Participants complained about the poor quality of advice received or that the result of an assessment was not properly followed up by the administration. Defensive practice was another negative effect highlighted in the responses with participants mentioning a reluctance to ‘operate [on] complex cases’ or ‘offer surgery to older/unwell patients who have a significant chance of potential benefit but not insignificant risk’. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the impact of participation in a mortality audit process on professional practice at the individual surgeon level
Summary
Surgical mortality audit is an important tool for quality assurance and professional development but little is known about the impact of such activity on professional practice at the individual surgeon level. Audit trends in surgical mortality are subsequently documented which helps to identify errors or gaps in surgical management and patient care [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Such auditing processes, especially those that involving peerreview procedures, should result in improved patient outcomes, quality of service and reflective practice in surgical care settings. As at April 2017, there are 29 public hospitals and 39 private hospitals participating in QASM [12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
