|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Mobilizing or standing still? A narrative review of Surgical Safety Checklist knowledge as developed in 25 highly cited papers from 2009-2016 (Forthcoming)|
|Citation:||Mitchell B, Cristancho S, Lingard L & Nyhof B (2017) Mobilizing or standing still? A narrative review of Surgical Safety Checklist knowledge as developed in 25 highly cited papers from 2009-2016 (Forthcoming), BMJ Quality and Safety.|
|Abstract:||The Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) was implemented as part of the World Health Organization’s Safer Surgery saves lives campaign. The SSC and its reported positive influence in the operating room was first published in 2008. Since then, this positive perception has changed. New research has identified mixed results showing limited or no change in outcomes following SSC implementation. Such research has prompted calls for the reconsideration of policies mandating the SSC as an organisational safety practice. In the context of this debate, the purpose of this narrative review was to evaluate how knowledge about SSC has been represented and reconstructed in high impact SSC papers. We used the h-index to identify highly impactful articles published between 2009 and 2016. We analysed these articles using three criteria that emerged as we reviewed them: 1) Whether the SSC was conceptualized as a ‘thing’ or a ‘process’, 2) Whether the SSC problem and solution were characterized as straightforward or complex issues and, 3) How the SSC knowledge was reconstructed from one paper to the next. We found that many papers in the sample exhibited a pattern of simplifying the story of SSC from earlier work, even when that work may itself have discussed a more nuanced characterization of SSC. This simplicity suggests that knowledge has not been mobilizing effectively across this body of work. We conclude that knowledge mobilization would be improved with a new generation of SSC research that particularly explores and enhances our understanding of the socio-cultural nuances of SSC practices.|
|Rights:||This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|Revised manuscript - 2nd Revision - April 6 2017.pdf||607.9 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 23/4/2018 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependant on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.