Introduction Good Surgical Practice from RCS England encourages the use of e-health records and detailed typed operative notes. The Covid-19 pandemic has led to multi-site operating. ENT operations in our trust were split over three sites including the private sector leading to potential disruption in continuity of patient care. Physical operation notes are difficult to access in emergencies, telephonic clinics or for audit purposes. We aim to have operative notes available on patients’ e-records which adhere to RCSEng guidelines. Method In this QIP, we reviewed all ENT operations over a retrospective one-month period recording percentage of notes uploaded to patient e-record and the number of surgeons in theatre. We created two novel RCSEng compliant e-operative notes with a user guide, generic and tonsillectomy-specific, and prospectively collected data to complete the cycle. Results 261 patients were included in both study periods. Only 36/134(27%) had e-operative pre-intervention improving to 71/127(56%) post-intervention. In the latter period, 76% of operations included a registrar and were more likely to have e-operative notes(72%) compared to when a consultant was operating alone(6%). There was low uptake of our tonsillectomy e-proforma(33%). Conclusions Our QIP has already proved effective with our templates increasing operative documentation on e-records. Increased use of e-template was more likely with the presence of a registrar in theatre. Room for improvement remains and we will re-audit after the introduction of further user-friendly operative templates and IT training. This QIP has also revealed additional operative training opportunities of which registrars can take advantage.

Background/Aims Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative COVID-19 and are associated with high mortality. The Royal College of Surgeons of England published guidance on recovery of surgical services during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. One part of this toolkit looked at unique considerations during the COVID-19 pandemic, in particular the risk of contracting COVID-19 while in the hospital. This quality improvement project sought to assess consent forms from the authors' surgical department to see if patients were being consented for the risks associated with COVID-19 during their stay in the hospital. Methods Over an 8-week period in October and November 2020, consent forms for patients under the general surgery department were audited four times against the Royal College of Surgeons of England's standards. Patients were included in the study if they were deemed to have capacity to consent to a procedure. Posters in the hospital, generic emails and teaching sessions were used as the interventions after each cycle of the audit. Results Baseline measurement showed that fewer than 37% of patients were consented for the risk of contracting COVID-19; this rose to almost 61%, 71% and 85% in the second, third and fourth parts of the project respectively. Year 1 and 2 core surgical trainees and clinical fellows below registrar level showed the greatest improvement, from consenting only 8% of patients up to 100% of patients, while specialty registrars showed improvement in consenting from 52% to 73%. The change was sustained 2 years after the initial interventions, with almost 60% of patients consented for the risk associated with in-hospital COVID-19 infection in March 2023. Conclusions Errors or omission of important elements in documentation of patient consent can delay operations, expose hospital trusts to medicolegal risk and ultimately may represent a failure to fully respect patient autonomy. This project sought to evaluate consenting practice during the presence of COVID-19 in society. While the teaching session showed some improvement in the consenting for the risk of COVID-19, emails and visual posters increased the consent rates further.