Streamlining surgical instrument counting: a matrixed multiple case study on the fidelity of weighing systems in the operating room
A.M. Kooijmans (Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)
M. van der Elst (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis)
J.J. van den Dobbelsteen (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Background
Many technologies have been developed to aid in surgical instrument counting, but wide adoption is rare. A technology that has been widely adopted around 20 years ago is the weighing scale. Lessons can be extracted from its sustainment and fidelity, and applied to the development and implementation of new laboursaving technologies in healthcare.
Methods
We conducted semi-structured interviews with experienced staff in four hospitals that use weighing systems in their surgical instrument cycle, which we analysed according to the Matrixed Multiple Case Study (MMCS) methodology. Hospitals were designated a low, medium, or high sustainment and fidelity score, after which influencing factors were identified. These factors were categorised according to the i-PARIHS domains of Innovation, Recipient, Context, and Facilitation. Within-site analysis and cross-site analysis was performed to identify influencing factors associated with a high or low level of sustainment or fidelity.
Results
All hospitals showed a high sustainment. Two hospitals showed low fidelity, and two showed high fidelity. Twenty-one total influencing factors were identified, divided among all i-PARIHS domains. All hospitals experienced similar limitations of the technology, and all hospitals showed signs of facilitation efforts during the implementation phase. In low-fidelity hospitals, interdepartmental coordination and trust in technology were limited, in contrast to high-fidelity hospitals. A large and/or complex surgical instrument inventory hindered fidelity of the weighing system.
Conclusions
20 years after implementation, there is varying success concerning the fidelity of weighing systems for surgical instrument counting. All participating hospitals have adapted their workflow to the limitations of the technology in different ways. Given the relative straight-forwardness of weighing scales as a technology, our findings underline the complexity of implementation processes, regardless of the complexity of the innovation.
help_outline