Table 4 Survey responses by perioperative staff role #
Provider n = 44 | Resident n = 30 | Nursing Staff n = 18 | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Readbacks significantly reduce verbal communication errors and improve patient safety | 5 (4–5) | 4 (4–5) | 5 (5–5) | 0.01 |
Readbacks are currently being used appropriately by the surgical staff in our hospital | 4 (3–4) | 4 (3–4) | 4 (3–5) | 0.42 |
I would attend a short training module on readbacks | 4 (4–5) | 3 (2–4) | 5 (5–5) | <0.001 |
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) | 5 (5–5) | 0.01 |
… there is a handoff of a surgical patient from the care of one provider to another | 4 (4–5) | 4 (4–5) | 5 (5–5) | 0.12 |
… used to count and verify surgical instruments and other items | 5 (4–5) | 4 (3–5) | 5 (4–5) | 0.08 |
… there are multiple perioperative tasks | 5 (4–5) | 4 (4–5) | 5 (4–5) | 0.41 |
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) | 3 (1–4) | 0.14 |
… the availability of time to perform readback statements | 4 (2–4) | 4 (2–4) | 5 (4–5) | <0.001 |
… general reluctance of parts of the surgical team to use readbacks | 3 (2.5-4) | 3 (3–4) | 4 (3–5) | 0.04 |
… the amount of training for staff that will be needed to implement readbacks | 3 (2–3) | 2 (2–3) | 3 (2–4) | 0.15 |
… the difficulty in deciding what type of communication should constitute a readback | 4 (2–4) | 3 (2–4) | 4 (3–5) | 0.27 |