Development and validation of a Self-assessment Instrument for Perioperative Patient Safety (SIPPS)

Abstract

BackgroundPatient safety is a fundamental value of healthcare to avoid patient harm. Non‐compliance with patient safety standards may result in patient harm and is therefore a global concern. A Self‐assessment Instrument for Perioperative Patient Safety (SIPPS) monitoring and benchmarking compliance to safety standards was validated in a multicentre pilot study.MethodsA preliminary questionnaire, based on the Dutch perioperative patient safety guidelines and covering international patient safety goals, was evaluated in a first digital RAND Delphi round. The results were used to optimize the questionnaire and design the SIPPS. For measurement and benchmarking purposes, SIPPS was categorized into seven main patient safety domains concerning all care episode phases of the perioperative trajectory. After consensus was reached in a face‐to‐face Delphi round, SIPPS was pilot‐tested in five hospitals for five characteristics: measurability, applicability, improvement potential, discriminatory capacity and feasibility.ResultsThe results of the first Delphi round showed moderate feasibility for the preliminary questionnaire (81·6 per cent). The pilot test showed good measurability for SIPPS: 99·8 per cent of requested information was assessable. Some 99·9 per cent of SIPPS questions were applicable to the selected respondents. With SIPPS, room for improvement in perioperative patient safety compliance was demonstrated for all hospitals, concerning all safety domains and all care episode phases of the perioperative trajectory (compliance 76·1 per cent). SIPPS showed mixed results for discriminatory capacity. SIPPS showed good feasibility for all items (range 91·9–95·7 per cent).ConclusionA self‐assessment instrument for measuring perioperative patient safety (SIPPS) compliance meeting international standards was validated. With SIPPS, improvement areas for perioperative patient safety and best practices across hospitals could be identified.

Prospective methods for identifying perioperative risk-assessment methods for patient safety over 20 years: a systematic review

“…The direct observation method was reported with a strong interrater reliability. In addition, good measurability, good applicability, good improvement potential and good/mixed results in the discriminatory capacity were reported for direct observation and questionnaire methods.…”

“…One study was excluded from further analysis because of low outcome and analysis scores ( Appendix S2 , supporting information). Thus, 20 studies showing good internal and external validity remained, and were used for in‐depth analysis.…”

“…However, doctor's instructions to the patient increased patient willingness to challenge doctors and nurses. Some 10 years later, a Self‐assessment Instrument for Perioperative Patient Safety (SIPPS) was developed and validated by perioperative healthcare staff. SIPPS showed good measurability (99·8 per cent) and applicability (99·9 per cent), although mean compliance was 76 per cent among five institutions, and mixed results were shown in discriminatory capacity.…”

“…Some 10 years later, a Self‐assessment Instrument for Perioperative Patient Safety (SIPPS) was developed and validated by perioperative healthcare staff. SIPPS showed good measurability (99·8 per cent) and applicability (99·9 per cent), although mean compliance was 76 per cent among five institutions, and mixed results were shown in discriminatory capacity. In 2018, a Surgical Safety Questionnaire was developed to be completed after gynaecological procedures, by surgeons, scrub nurses and anaesthetists.…”

“…Various quality characteristics were reported in five of the included studies: three direct observation studies and two questionnaires ( Appendix S3 , supporting information). The direct observation method was reported with a strong interrater reliability.…”