To explore healthcare professionals', patients', and family members' experiences of managing regular medications across the perioperative pathway in a specialist cancer hospital in Melbourne.
An exploratory qualitative study using a descriptive-interpretive approach.
Interviews were conducted with 11 patients and seven family members, and focus groups with 10 anaesthetists, seven surgeons, four nurses, and 10 pharmacists (N = 49) between October 2024 and April 2025. Transcripts were analysed using Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic approach and mapped into the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 human factors framework.
Three interrelated themes were constructed: (1) Work system elements shaping perioperative medication management, encompassing medication and surgical contexts, documentation gaps, reliable medication information, communication infrastructures, roles and responsibilities, and perioperative area resources; (2) Processes influencing medication management practice, characterised by continuity of care at transition points and flagging processes, interdisciplinary collaboration and role interpretation in medication management, patient involvement, family member involvement, and healthcare professional perspectives; and (3) Outcomes of medication management, including patient and organisational outcomes, such as workflow inefficiencies, procedure cancellations, and unplanned readmissions.
Findings indicated that addressing the complexity of perioperative medication safety demands coordinated contributions across multiple professional disciplines. Strengthening interdisciplinary collaboration, clarifying shared responsibilities, embedding structured reconciliation processes at transitions of care, standardizing communication protocols, and involving patients and families are all critical strategies.
This study highlights the need for interdisciplinary coordination and clear role definitions, with nurses as the key contributor, to support collaborative medication decisions in perioperative cancer care.
This study explored challenges in managing regular medications during cancer surgery, offering insights to guide safer practices for perioperative teams, patients, and families in cancer care settings.
COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) guidelines.
None.
Semi-urgent surgery where surgical intervention is required within 48 h of admission and the patient is medically stable is vulnerable to scheduling delays. Given the challenges in accessing health care, there is a need for a detailed understanding of the factors that impact decisions on scheduling semi-urgent surgeries.
To identify and describe the organisational, departmental and contextual factors that determine healthcare professionals' prioritising patients for semi-urgent surgeries.
We used the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. Four online databases were used: EBSCO Academic Search Complete, EBSCO Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, OVID Embase and EBSCO Medline. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they published in English and focussed on the scheduling of patients for surgery were included. Data were extracted by one author and checked by another and analysed descriptively. Findings were synthesises using the Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations framework.
Twelve articles published between 1999 and 2022 were included. The Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations framework highlighted themes of emergency surgery scheduling and its impact on operating room utilisation. Gaps in the management of operating room utilisation and the incorporation of semi-urgent surgeries into operating schedules were also identified. Finally, the lack of consensus on the definition of semi-urgent surgery and the parameters used to assign surgical acuity to patients was evident.
This scoping review identified patterns in the scheduling methods, and involvement of key decision makers. Yet there is limited evidence about how key decision makers reach consensus on prioritising patients for semi-urgent surgery and its impact on patient experience.
No Patient or Public Contribution.