Precision in practice: Developing and validating a protocol and a checklist for standardization of ‘surgical counts’

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26550/2209-1092.1399

Keywords:

Checklist, Delphi study, Delphi technique, Institutional policy, Foreign body, Reliability and validity, Retained surgical items, Surgical sponge, Surgical tools

Abstract

Background: The prevention of unintentional retention of surgical items (RSIs) inside a patient’s body is one of the primary responsibilities of operating room nurses. Surgical counting is a simple and efficient method that helps prevent this human error.

Aim: To develop and validate a standard operating protocol (SOP) and a checklist for surgical counts conducted during abdominal surgeries.

Methods and materials: A methodological study, divided into six phases (2021-2023), was conducted in the paediatric surgery operating theatre of a tertiary care centre in northern India. Initial observations (N = 30), focus group discussions (N = 20) and nurses' knowledge assessment (N = 24) were carried out to explore baseline knowledge and practices related to surgical counts. The first draft of the SOP and checklist was prepared. A three-round Delphi process involving nine experts was employed to ensure content validity. The reliability of the protocol was evaluated across 75 surgical procedures using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and nurses' acceptance of the protocol was gauged through a structured questionnaire.

Results: Content validity was high, with a scale-level content validity index based on the average method (S-CVI/Ave) of 0.98 and a scale-level content validity index based on the universal-agreement method (S-CVI/UA) of 0.80. The mean item-level content validity index (I-CVI) was 0.90. The checklist comprised 37 items covering the key phases of surgery. Internal consistency was strong (Cronbach’s α = 0.82). Following implementation, surgical counting practices improved considerably, and nurses reported greater clarity and confidence.

Conclusion: The SOP and checklist were found to be valid, reliable and well accepted in this single-centre study; further multicentre validation is recommended.

 

Author Biographies

Arti Saini, Nursing Officer

Arti Saini, Nursing Officer, Department of Pediatric Surgery, PGIMER, Chandigarh

Dr Sukhpal, Professor and Principal, National Institute of Nursing Education, PGIMER, Chandigarh

Dr Sukhpal Kaur (PhD) Professor and Principal, National Institute of Nursing Education, PGIMER, Chandigarh

Prof JK Mahajan, Professor and Head, Department of Pediatric Surgery, PGIMER, Chandigarh

Prof JK Mahajan, Head, Department of Pediatric Surgery, PGIMER, Chandigarh

Prabhjot Kaur, Tutor, National Institute of Nursing Education, PGIMER, Chandigarh

Mrs. Prabhjot Kaur, Tutor, National Institute of Nursing Education, PGIMER, Chandigarh

References

1. Putnam K. Guideline for prevention of retained surgical items. AORN J. 2015[cited 2022 Jan 24];102(6):P11-P13. doi:10.1016/s0001-2092(15)01014-5.

2. World Health Organization. WHO guidelines for safe surgery 2009: safe surgery saves lives [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009 [cited 2022 Jan 24]. Available from: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/44185

3. Gawande AA, Studdert DM, Orav EJ, Brennan TA, Zinner MJ. Risk factors for retained instruments and sponges after surgery. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(3):229-235. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa021721.

4. The Joint Commission. Sentinel event alert 51: preventing unintended retained foreign objects [Internet]. Oakbrook Terrace (IL): The Joint Commission; 2013 Oct 17 [cited 2022 Jan 24]. Available from: https://www.jointcommission.org/resources/patient-safety-topics/sentinel-event/sentinel-event-alert-newsletter/

5. American College of Surgeons. Prevention of unintentionally retained surgical items after surgery [Internet]. Chicago (IL): American College of Surgeons; 2016 Oct 1 [cited 2022 Jan 26]. Available from: https://www.facs.org/about-acs/statements/92-retained-items

6. Amare G. Reviewing the values of a standard operating procedure. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2012[cited 2022 Jan 24];22(3):205-208.

7. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance for preparing standard operating procedures (SOPs) [Internet]. Washington (DC): United States Environmental Protection Agency; 2007 [cited 2022 Oct 23]. Report No.: EPA/600/B-07/001. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-06/documents/g6-final.pdf

8. Arriaga AF, Bader AM, Wong JM, Lipsitz SR, Berry WR, Ziewacz JE, et al. Simulation-based trial of surgical-crisis checklists. N Engl J Med. 2013[cited 2022 Jan 24];368(3):246-253. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1204720.

9. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res.1986[cited 2022 Jan 24];35(6):382-385. doi:10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017.

10. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Retained surgical items: causation and prevention [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2023 [cited 2025 Dec 17]. Available from: https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primer/retained-surgical-items-causation-and-prevention

11. Mukantwari J, Omondi L, Ntakirutimana C, Nyirasafari E. A description of surgical counting safety practices among operating room nurses and midwives in Rwanda. J Surg Nurs. 2019[cited 2022 Jan 24];1(1):e17422. doi:10.21203/rs.2.17422/v1.

12. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: principles and methods. 7th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004. p. 423.

13. Popham WJ. Criterion-referenced measurement: the state of the art. Educational Measurement. 1978;3:19-25.

14. Linstone HA, Turoff M, editors. The Delphi method: techniques and applications [Internet]. Reading (MA): Addison-Wesley; 1975 [cited 2022 Jan 24]. Available from: https://web.njit.edu/~turoff/pubs/delphibook/ch1.html

Downloads

Published

18-10-2026

How to Cite

Saini, A., Kaur, S., Mahajan, J. K., & Kaur, P. (2026). Precision in practice: Developing and validating a protocol and a checklist for standardization of ‘surgical counts’. Journal of Perioperative Nursing, 39(2), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.26550/2209-1092.1399

Issue

Section

Articles