Knowledge, practices, and barriers of surgical items counting among perioperative team in public hospitals, Tshwane district Gauteng province

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Counting surgical items is an important process in the operating room and is defined as the manual process of counting surgical items during a surgical procedure. Standardised methods for counting surgical items and miscellaneous materials can prevent foreign bodies from being left at the surgical site. The perioperative team is required to count surgical items during surgery to prevent errors and harm to prevent complications such as prolonged hospital stays, repeated open surgical procedures, high rates of medical expenses, morbidity and death in patients who underwent surgery due to a retained surgical items. AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the knowledge, practices and barriers of surgical item counting among the perioperative team in public hospitals, Tshwane District, Gauteng Province. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A non - experimental, quantitative, descriptive design was used. The setting was the operating theatres of three hospitals in the Tshwane District of Gauteng Province South Africa. The total population sampling method, which is the type of purposive sampling where the whole population of interest is studied, was used. The data were collected through the use of a standardised validated questionnaire. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) statistics version 28 software was used to perform the analysis with the assistance of a biostatistician. The data are presented as descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The perioperative team in three selected hospitals in the Tshwane District of Gauteng Province working in operating theatres displayed different knowledge, practices and barriers regarding the counting of surgical items. A total of 87.7% (n=193) of the respondents conducted surgery according to hospital policy and WHO guidelines; however, they noted that there was a significant difference in surgical team implementation (p=0.028) of surgical item counting. Sixty-six-point five percent 66.5% (n=147) of the respondents disagreed that surgical item counting is conducted for certain surgical procedures, and 33.5% (n=74) agreed. A total of 30.8% (n=68) reported different styles of surgical item counting, and 69.2% (n=153) reported that they counted the same. Furthermore, 89.1% (n=197) of the respondents noted that they performed surgical item counting when additional items were added to the surgical field, however 10.0% (n=22) indicated that they sometimes counted, while 0.9% (n=02) did not count. Additionally, 63.8% (n=141) of the respondents indicated that multiple mentors with different methods demonstrated how to conduct surgical counts, and only 36.2%(n=80) reported that they demonstrated the same.