Background Accurate and thorough surgical ward round documentation is crucial for maintaining quality clinical care. Accordingly, checklists have been proposed to improve ward round documentation. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the literature investigating the use of checklists to improve surgical ward round documentation. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched on August 16, 2021. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. We included English studies that investigated the use of checklists during ward rounds in various surgical subspecialties compared to routine care, where the rates of documentation were reported as outcomes. We excluded studies that used checklists in outpatient, non-surgical, or pediatric settings. Due to heterogeneity of outcome measures, meta-analysis was precluded. This study was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021273735) and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020) reporting guidelines. Results A total of 206 studies were identified, only 9 were suitable for inclusion. All included studies were single-center observational studies, spanning across seven surgical specialties. Rates of documentation on 4–23 parameters were reported. Documentation for all measured outcomes improved in 8/9 studies; however, statistical analyses were not included. There was a high risk of bias due to the nature of observational studies. Conclusion Ward round checklists can serve as a useful tool to improve inpatient care and safety. Currently, there is no high-level evidence showing the effectiveness of checklists on ward round documentation. The synthesis of results indicates that further high-quality research is imperative.

Background Surgical outpatient consultations are demanding for the surgeon and patients without a definite formula for success. Various factors have been identified regarding factors that influence patient satisfaction and engagement. We aimed to examine the modern‐day surgical outpatient consultation and report on these factors. Methods An observational cross‐sectional study was performed by reviewing video recordings of 182 surgical consultations by 12 surgeons at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, South Australia, Australia. Results The mean consultation time was 12.3 min, with pre‐surgical consultations being the longest. There were 107 consultations for benign conditions (58%). Proportionally, the consultant spoke most (51.9% of total consultation time), followed by the patient (19.5%) and then companion (8.2%). Forty‐eight (26.4%) patients brought a companion to the clinic but monopolisation of the consultation by the companion was rare. When a companion was present, there was more mutual eye gaze between the consultant and the patient. Interruptions were present in 23.6% of consultations and were associated with a significant increase of the length of the consultation. Table positioning did not seem to affect the dynamics of the outpatient consultation. Conclusion Companions are highly valuable for promoting patient engagement and their presence should be encouraged in surgical outpatients. Interruptions should be kept to a minimum to avoid unnecessary delays. Further studies should be conducted to investigate the effect of companions, interruptions and table positioning during a consultation on patient outcomes.