Skip to main content

Table 3 Survey responses stratified by Department #

From: Introducing standardized “readbacks” to improve patient safety in surgery: a prospective survey in 92 providers at a public safety-net hospital

 

Anesthesia n = 24

Surgery n = 68

P-value

Readbacks would significantly reduce verbal communication errors and improve patient safety

5 (4–5)

5 (4–5)

0.10

Readbacks are currently being used appropriately by the surgical staff in our hospital

4 (3.5-4)

4 (3–4)

0.77

I would attend a short training module on readbacks should the concept be formally implemented

4 (3–5)

4 (3–5)

0.74

Readbacks would be helpful in reducing verbal communication errors when …

… a request is made to carry out an important task that has implications on safety of the patient

5 (4–5)

5 (4–5)

0.86

… there is a handoff of a surgical patient from the care of one provider to another

4.5 (4–5)

4.5 (4–5)

0.87

… used to count and verify surgical instruments and other items

5 (4–5)

5 (4–5)

0.07

… there are multiple perioperative tasks

4 (4–5)

4.5 (4–5)

0.86

Significant barriers to implementation of readbacks in the perioperative setting include …

… the lack of a general “safety culture” in the surgical department

2 (1–3)

2 (1–3)

0.84

… the availability of time to perform readback statements

4 (3–4)

4 (2–4)

0.54

… general reluctance of parts of the surgical team to use readbacks

4 (3–4)

3 (2–4)

0.07

… the amount of training for staff that will be needed to implement readbacks

2 (2–3)

3 (2–3)

0.13

… the difficulty in deciding what type of communication should constitute a readback

4 (2–4)

4 (2–4)

0.78

  1. # Data are shown as medians and interquartile ranges.
  2. Survey scale:
  3. 1 = strongly disagree; 2 = somewhat disagree; 3 = neutral; 4 = somewhat agree; 5 = strongly agree.