Key result
The introduction of tourniquet parameters in the operation note template and machine labels significantly improved the documentation of tourniquet pressure from 71% to 94%.
Why the study?
Improper tourniquet use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery can lead to complications, prompting an audit against 2021 British Orthopaedic Association guidance.
Does the introduction of tourniquet parameters in operation notes and pressure calculation aids improve compliance with safe tourniquet use guidelines in trauma operations?
Observational (n=80)
No
Does the introduction of tourniquet parameters in operation notes and pressure calculation aids improve compliance with safe tourniquet use guidelines in trauma operations?
The introduction of mandatory tourniquet parameters in operation notes and calculation aids significantly improves adherence to safety guidelines for tourniquet use in trauma surgery.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports template interventions to improve tourniquet documentation compliance; hypothesis-generating for effects on trauma surgery outcomes.
Introduction Tourniquets are used widely in trauma and orthopaedic surgery to reduce blood loss and facilitate better visualisation of the operative field; however, some complications can result from improper use such as pressure sores, chemical burns, compartment syndrome, and deep vein thrombosis. We audited the use of intraoperative tourniquets in our trauma theatre against the guidance published by the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) in 2021. Methods This was a closed-loop audit evaluating 80 trauma operations that utilised tourniquets. In the first cycle, we audited 40 operations (23 upper limbs vs 17 lower limbs) over a period of two months through a review of operation notes and theatre documentation. We presented our findings and implemented changes including the addition of tourniquet use to the operation note template and labels on the tourniquet machines aiding the calculation of tourniquet pressures. A re-audit was then performed involving a further 40 operations (20 upper limbs and 20 lower limbs). Statistical analyses were performed to compare the two cycles. Results Tourniquet time was on average similar across both audit cycles (60.7 vs 70.0, p = 0.192) with compliance up to standard in 97% of cases. Post-intervention, there was an improvement in the documentation of skin status (37 vs 69%, p = 0.004), tourniquet isolation method (43% vs 74%, p = 0.003), and tourniquet pressure (71% vs 94%, p = 0.003). The difference between tourniquet pressure and systolic blood pressure was on average lower post-intervention for the upper limb (125.9 vs 99.9, p < 0.01) and lower limb operations (154.2 vs 121.7, p < 0.01). Adherence to the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST) guidance with tourniquet pressure improved with intervention (25% vs 75%). Conclusion The introduction of tourniquet parameters in the operation note template and patient-specific calculation of tourniquet pressures improved the safe use of tourniquets within the trauma theatre.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vayalapra et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Trauma and orthopaedic surgery requiring tourniquet (n=80). Operation note template modification and tourniquet machine labels vs. Standard practice (pre-intervention) was evaluated on Documentation of tourniquet pressure (p=0.003). The introduction of tourniquet parameters in the operation note template and machine labels significantly improved the documentation of tourniquet pressure from 71% to 94%.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: