Adverse Events in the Operating Room: Definitions, Prevalence, and Characteristics. A Systematic Review

Study protocol for the Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) global cross-specialty surveys and consensus

Annually, about 300 million surgeries lead to significant intraoperative adverse events (iAEs), impacting patients and surgeons. Their full extent is underestimated due to flawed assessment and reporting methods. Inconsistent adoption of new grading systems and a lack of standardization, along with litigation concerns, contribute to underreporting. Only half of relevant journals provide guidelines on reporting these events, with a lack of standards in surgical literature. To address these issues, the Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standard (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration was established in 2022. The initiative involves conducting global surveys and a Delphi consensus to understand the barriers for poor reporting of iAEs, validate shared criteria for reporting, define iAEs according to surgical procedures, evaluate the existing grading systems' reliability, and identify strategies for enhancing the collection, reporting, and management of iAEs. Invitation to participate are extended to all the surgical specialties, interventional cardiology, interventional radiology, OR Staffs and anesthesiology. This effort represents an essential step towards improved patient safety and the well-being of healthcare professionals in the surgical field.

The anatomy of safe surgical teams: an interview-based qualitative study among members of surgical teams at tertiary referral hospitals in Norway

BACKGROUND

In spite of the global implementation of surgical safety checklists to improve patient safety, patients undergoing surgical procedures remain vulnerable to a high risk of potentially preventable complications and adverse outcomes. The present study was designed to explore the surgical teams' perceptions of patient safety culture, capture their perceptions of the risk for adverse events, and identify themes of interest for quality improvement within the surgical department.

METHODS

This qualitative study had an explorative design with an abductive approach. Individual semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted between 10/01/23 and 11/05/23. The participants were members of surgical teams (n = 17), general and orthopedic surgeons (n = 5), anesthesiologists (n = 4), nurse anesthetists (n = 4) and operating room nurses (n = 4). Middle managers recruited purposively from general and orthopedic surgical teams in two tertiary hospitals in Norway, aiming for a maximum variation due to gender, age, and years within the specialty. The data material was analyzed following Braun and Clarke's method for reflexive thematic analysis to generate patterns of meaning and develop themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

The analysis process resulted in three themes describing the participants' perceptions of patient safety culture in the surgical context: (1) individual accountability as a safety net, (2) psychological safety as a catalyst for well-being and safe performance in the operating room, and (3) the importance of proactive structures and participation in organizational learning.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided an empirical insight into the culture of patient safety in the surgical context. The study highlighted the importance of supporting the individuals' competence, building psychological safety in the surgical team, and creating structures and culture promoting a learning organization. Quality improvement projects, including interventions based on these results, may increase patient safety culture and reduce the frequency of adverse events in the surgical context.

Interprofessional staff perspectives on the adoption of or black box technology and simulations to improve patient safety: a multi-methods survey

INTRODUCTION

Medical errors still plague healthcare. Operating Room Black Box (ORBB) and ORBB-simulation (ORBBSIM) are innovative emerging technologies which continuously capture as well as categorize intraoperative data, team information, and audio-visual files, in effort to improve objective quality measures. ORBB and ORBBSIM have an opportunity to improve patient safety, yet a paucity of implementation literature exists. Overcoming implementation barriers is critical. This study sought to obtain rich insights while identifying facilitators and barriers to adoption of ORBB and ORBBSIM in alignment with Donabedian's model of health services and healthcare quality. Enrichment themes included translational performance improvement and real-world examples to develop sessions.

METHODS

Interprofessional OR staff were invited to complete two surveys assessing staff's perceptions using TeamSTEPPS's validated Teamwork Perceptions Questionnaire (T-TPQ) and open-ended questions. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative variables, and inductive phenomenological content analysis was used for qualitative.

RESULTS

Survey 1 captured 71 responses from 334 invited (RR 21%) while survey 2 captured 47 responses from 157 (RR 29.9%). The T-TPQ score was 65.2, with Communication (70.4) the highest construct and Leadership (58.0) the lowest. Quality Improvement (QI), Patient Safety, and Objective Case Review were the most common perceived ORBB benefits. Trends suggested a reciprocal benefit of dual ORBB and ORBBSIM adoption. Trends also suggested that dual implementation can promote Psychological Safety, culture, trust, and technology comfort. The need for an implementation plan built on change management principles and a constructive culture were key findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings supported ORBB implementation themes from previous literature and deepened our understanding through the exploration of team culture. This blueprint provides a model to help organizations adopt ORBB and ORBBSIM. Outcomes can establish an empirical paradigm for future studies.

Applying an equity lens to hospital safety monitoring: a critical interpretive synthesis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Hospital safety monitoring systems are foundational to how adverse events are identified and addressed. They are well positioned to bring equity-related safety issues to the forefront for action. However, there is uncertainty about how they have been, and can be, used to achieve this goal. We will undertake a critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) to examine how equity is integrated into hospital safety monitoring systems.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This review will follow CIS principles. Our initial compass question is: How is equity integrated into safety monitoring systems? We will begin with a structured search strategy of hospital safety monitoring systems in CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO for up to May 2023 to identify papers on safety monitoring systems generally and those linked to equity (eg, racism, social determinants of health). We will also review reference lists of selected papers, contact experts and draw on team expertise. For subsequent literature searching stages, we will use team expertise and expert contacts to purposively search the social science, humanities and health services research literature to support the development of a theoretical understanding of our topic. Following data extraction, we will use interpretive processes to develop themes and a critique of the literature. The above processes of question formulation, article search and selection, data extraction, and critique and synthesis will be iterative and interactive with the goal to develop a theoretical understanding of equity in hospital monitoring systems that will have practice-based implications.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not require ethical approval because we are reviewing published literature. We aim to publish findings in a peer-reviewed journal and present at conferences.

Value of applying interactive micro-courses on occupational protection in operating room for nursing trainees

This study aimed to investigate the application value of an interactive micro class on occupational protection in the operating room for nursing interns. Using a cluster sampling approach, 200 junior college nursing interns were selected as participants at our hospital, who were practicing from June 2020 to April 2021. They were randomly assigned to either the observation group or the control group, with 100 participants in each. Data on teaching-related evaluation indicators, including clarity of teaching objectives, learning atmosphere, rational use of learning resources, effectiveness of teaching process regulation, and degree of students' participation in activities, were collected for both groups. Additionally, the scores of occupational protection assessment in the operating room, which encompassed physical, chemical, biological, environmental, and physiological and psychological factors, were also recorded. The comparative analysis of teaching-related evaluation indicators between the 2 groups revealed statistically significant differences. Specifically, significant differences were found between the 2 groups in the clarity of teaching objectives (P = .007), learning atmosphere (P < .001), rational use of learning resources (P < .001), effectiveness of teaching process regulation (P = .01), and degree of students' participation in activities (P < .001). Furthermore, the scores of all items in the observation group were higher than those in the control group. Additionally, the comparison results of the scores of the occupational protection assessment in the operating room between the 2 groups showed that while there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups before the intervention (P > .05). However, after the intervention, statistically significant differences were found between the 2 groups in physical (P < .001), chemical (P = .001), biological (P < .001), environmental (P < .001), and physiological and psychological factors (P < .001). Additionally, the scores of all items in the observation group were higher than those in the control group. The implementation of the interactive micro class enhanced the quality of teaching related to occupational protection in the operating room for interning nurses, thus verifying its benefits in clinical teaching practices.

The association between patient safety culture and adverse events - a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Adverse events (AEs) affect 10% of in-hospital patients, causing increased costs, injuries, disability and mortality. Patient safety culture (PSC) is an indicator of quality in healthcare services and is thus perceived as a proxy for the quality of care. Previous studies show variation in the association between PSC scores and AE rates. The main objective of this scoping review is to summarise the evidence on the association between PSC scores and AE rates in healthcare services. In addition, map the characteristics and the applied research methodology in the included studies, and study the strengths and limitations of the evidence.

METHODS

We applied a scoping review methodology to answer the broad research questions of this study, following the PRISMA-ScR checklist. A systematic search in seven databases was conducted in January 2022. The records were screened independently against eligibility criteria using Rayyan software, and the extracted data were collated in a charting form. Descriptive representations and tables display the systematic mapping of the literature.

RESULTS

We included 34 out of 1,743 screened articles. The mapping demonstrated a statistical association in 76% of the studies, where increased PSC scores were associated with reduced AE rates. Most of the studies had a multicentre design and were conducted in-hospital in high-income countries. The methodological approaches to measuring the association varied, including missing reports on the tools` validation and participants, different medical specialties, and work unit level of measurements. In addition, the review identified a lack of eligible studies for meta-analysis and synthesis and demonstrated a need for an in-depth understanding of the association, including context complexity.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the vast majority of studies report reduced AE rates when PSC scores increase. This review demonstrates a lack of studies from primary care and low- and- middle-income countries. There is a discrepancy in utilised concepts and methodology, hence there is a need for a broader understanding of the concepts and the contextual factors, and more uniform methodology. Longitudinal prospective studies with higher quality can enhance efforts to improve patient safety.

Appraisal of Intraoperative Adverse Events to Improve Postoperative Care

Background: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are associated with adverse postoperative outcomes and cause a significant healthcare burden. However, a critical appraisal of iAEs is lacking. Considering the details of iAEs could benefit postoperative care. We comprehensively analyzed iAEs in a large series including all types of operations and their relation to postoperative complications. Methods: All patients enrolled in the multicenter ClassIntra® validation study (NCT03009929) were included in this analysis. The surgical and anesthesia team prospectively recorded all iAEs. Two researchers, blinded to each other’s ratings, appraised all recorded iAEs according to their origin into four categories: surgery, anesthesia, organization, or other, including subcategories such as organ injury, arrhythmia, or instrument failure. They further descriptively analyzed subcategories of all iAEs. Postoperative complications were assessed using the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®), a weighted sum of all postoperative complications according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. The association of iAE origins in addition to the severity grade of ClassIntra® on CCI® was assessed with a multivariable mixed-effects generalized linear regression analysis. Results: Of 2520 included patients, 778 iAEs were recorded in 610 patients. The origin was surgical in 420 (54%), anesthesia in 283 (36%), organizational in 34 (4%), and other in 41 (5%) events. Bleeding (n = 217, 28%), hypotension (n = 118, 15%), and organ injury (n = 98, 13%) were the three most frequent subcategories in surgery and anesthesia, respectively. In the multivariable mixed-effect analysis, no significant association between the origin and CCI® was observed. Conclusion: Analyzing the type and origin of an iAE offers individualized and contextualized information. This detailed descriptive information can be used for targeted surveillance of intra- and postoperative care, even though the overall predictive value for postoperative events was not improved by adding the origin in addition to the severity grade.

What are side effects?

Side effects are ubiquitous in medicine and they often play a role in treatment decisions for patients and clinicians alike. Philosophers and health researchers often use side effects to illustrate issues with contemporary medical research and practice. However, technical definitions of 'side effect' differ among health authorities. Thus, determining the side effects of an intervention can differ depending on whose definition we assume. Here I review some of the common definitions of side effect and highlight their issues. In response, I offer an account of side effects as jointly (i) unintended and (ii) effects due to the causal capacities or invariances of an intervention. I discuss (i) by examining the intentions or reasons behind therapeutic interventions, and I discuss (ii) by appealing to a manipulationist model of causation. The analysis here highlights that side effects are conceptually distinct from related outcomes like adverse events, adverse drug reactions, and placebo effects. The analysis also allows for reflection on the utility of 'side effect' as a technical term in medical research and practice.

Automated Capture of Intraoperative Adverse Events Using Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) impact the outcomes of surgery, and yet are not routinely collected, graded, and reported. Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have the potential to power real-time, automatic detection of these events and disrupt the landscape of surgical safety through the prediction and mitigation of iAEs. We sought to understand the current implementation of AI in this space. A literature review was performed to PRISMA-DTA standards. Included articles were from all surgical specialties and reported the automatic identification of iAEs in real-time. Details on surgical specialty, adverse events, technology used for detecting iAEs, AI algorithm/validation, and reference standards/conventional parameters were extracted. A meta-analysis of algorithms with available data was conducted using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the article risk of bias and clinical applicability. A total of 2982 studies were identified by searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore, with 13 articles included for data extraction. The AI algorithms detected bleeding (n = 7), vessel injury (n = 1), perfusion deficiencies (n = 1), thermal damage (n = 1), and EMG abnormalities (n = 1), among other iAEs. Nine of the thirteen articles described at least one validation method for the detection system; five explained using cross-validation and seven divided the dataset into training and validation cohorts. Meta-analysis showed the algorithms were both sensitive and specific across included iAEs (detection OR 14.74, CI 4.7-46.2). There was heterogeneity in reported outcome statistics and article bias risk. There is a need for standardization of iAE definitions, detection, and reporting to enhance surgical care for all patients. The heterogeneous applications of AI in the literature highlights the pluripotent nature of this technology. Applications of these algorithms across a breadth of urologic procedures should be investigated to assess the generalizability of these data.

Patient Safety and the Question of Dignitary Harms

Patient safety is a central aspect of healthcare quality, focusing on preventable, iatrogenic harm. Harm, in this context, is typically assumed to mean physical injury to patients, often caused by technical error. However, some contributions to the patient safety literature have argued that disrespectful behavior towards patients can cause harm, even when it does not lead to physical injury. This paper investigates the nature of such dignitary harms and explores whether they should be included within the scope of patient safety as a field of practice. We argue that dignitary harms in health care are-at least sometimes-preventable, iatrogenic harms. While we caution against including dignitary harms within the scope of patient safety just because they are relevantly similar to other iatrogenic harms, we suggest that thinking about dignitary harms can help to elucidate the value of patient safety, and to illuminate the evolving relationship between safety and quality.

Prevalence and associated factors of self-reported medical errors and adverse events among operating room nurses in China

Background

In recent decades, the prominence of medical errors (MEs) and adverse events (AEs) is fueled by several studies performed across the world. Correspondingly, a high prevalence of medical errors and adverse events have been reported. Operating room nurses (ORNs) were indispensable members of the operating process, and any kind of MEs or AEs from ORNs may cause serious results and even death to the patients. However, to the best of our knowledge, the prevalence and associated factors of MEs and AEs were never reported among ORNs in China, which is the largest country in population and health services quantity in the world.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study, which was conducted among ORNs in China, and 787 valid questionnaires were analyzed in this study. MEs, AEs, gender, age, married status, religious belief, academic degree, manager or not, working years, working hours/week, physical disease, and mental health were evaluated in this study. MEs were evaluated by eight questions about the occurrence of eight kinds of MEs for the ORNs. For ORNs with MEs, further questions about clinical harm to the patients were interviewed, which analyzed AEs. Kessler 10 was used to evaluate the ORNs' mental health. Logistic regression was conducted to examine the factors associated with MEs and AEs.

Results

The prevalence of MEs and AEs was 27.7 and 13.9% among ORNs, respectively. The most frequent MEs that occurred among ORNs were from surgical instruments (9.1%), disinfection (9.0%), equipment and consumables (8.9%), and specimen management (7.8%). MEs were positively associated with lower working years, poor mental health, and physical disease. The physical disease was positively associated with AEs.

Conclusion

The prevalence of perceived MEs and AEs was at a higher level than other kinds of nurses. Fresh ORNs with physical and mental health problems were the risk population for MEs, and ORNs with physical disease were at a higher risk for AEs. All the findings implied that MEs and AEs were an important issue for ORNs, and ORNs with physical and mental health problems should be paid attention to control MEs and AEs.

The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration Project: Development of Criteria for Reporting Adverse Events During Surgical Procedures and Evaluating Their Impact on the Postoperative Course

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are surgical and anesthesiologic complications. Despite the availability of grading criteria, iAEs are infrequently reported in the surgical literature and in cases for which iAEs are reported, these events are described with significant heterogeneity.

OBJECTIVE

To develop Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration criteria to standardize the assessment, reporting, and grading of iAEs. The ultimate aim is to improve our understanding of the nature and frequency of iAEs and our ability to counsel patients regarding surgical procedures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The present study involved the following steps: (1) collecting criteria for assessing, reporting, and grading of iAEs via a comprehensive umbrella review; (2) collecting additional criteria via a survey of a panel of experienced surgeons (first round of a modified Delphi survey); (3) creating a comprehensive list of reporting criteria; (4) combining criteria acquired in the first two steps; and (5) establishing a consensus on clinical and quality assessment utility as determined in the second round of the Delphi survey.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Panel inter-rater agreement and consistency were assessed as the overall percentage agreement and Cronbach's α.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The umbrella review led to nine common criteria for assessing, grading, and reporting iAEs, and review of iAE grading systems led to two additional criteria. In the first Delphi round, 35 surgeons responded and two criteria were added. In the second Delphi round, 13 common criteria met the threshold for final guideline inclusion. All 13 criteria achieved the consensus minimum of 70%, with agreement on the usefulness of the criteria for clinical and quality improvement ranging from 74% to 100%. The mean inter-rater agreement was 89.0% for clinical improvement and 88.6% for quality improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICARUS Global Collaboration criteria might aid in identifying important criteria when reporting iAEs, which will support all those involved in patient care and scientific publishing.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We consulted a panel of experienced surgeons to develop a set of guidelines for academic surgeons to follow when publishing surgical studies. The surgeon panel proposed a list of 13 criteria that may improve global understanding of complications during specific procedures and thus improve the ability to counsel patients on surgical risk.

Patient safety culture as perceived by operating room professionals: a mixed-methods study

Background

Routine assessments of patient safety culture within hospitals have been widely recommended to improve patient safety. Experts suggested that mixed-methods studies can help gain a deeper understanding of the concept. However, studies combining quantitative and qualitative approaches exploring patient safety culture are still lacking. This study aimed to explore patient safety culture as perceived by operating room professionals of two university hospitals in Sousse, Tunisia.

Methods

Based on a mixed-methods approach, a cross-sectional survey followed by semi-structured interviews were conducted over a period of two months (December 2019 to January 2020). This study took place in all the operating rooms of two public university hospitals in the district of Sousse, Tunisia. To collect data for this survey, the French version of the Hospital Survey On Patient Safety Culture was used. For interviews, 13 participants were selected purposively using a critical case sampling approach and a topic guide was prepared. Anonymity and confidentiality were respected.

Results

Overall, twelve operating rooms, with different surgical specialties, were included in the study. Survey feedback was provided by 297 professionals representing a response rate of 85.6%. Concerning patient safety culture, the 10 dimensions had low scores (below 50%) and were considered “to be improved”. The highest score was found in ‘teamwork within units’ (45%). Whereas, the lowest scores were allocated to ‘non-punitive response to error’ (22.9%), followed by “frequency of adverse event reported” (25.6%) and “communication openness” (26.3%). Per qualitative data, participants provided a more detailed picture of patient safety issues such as underreporting, absence of an effective reporting system, lack of freedom of expression, and an existing blame culture in operating rooms.

Conclusions

The findings of this study showed a concerning perception held by participants about the lack of a patient safety culture in their operating rooms. It seems essential to design, implement and evaluate strategies that promote a positive patient safety culture and obliterate punitive climate in operating rooms.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08175-z.

Intraoperative adverse events as a risk factor for local recurrence of rectal cancer after resection surgery

AIM

Failure to achieve a radical resection as well as intraoperative rectal perforation are important risk factors for local recurrence after rectal cancer surgery, but the importance of other intraoperative adverse events for the prognosis is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the occurrence of intraoperative adverse events during rectal cancer surgery, and to determine whether these were associated with an increased risk of local recurrence.

METHODS

A retrospective population-based cohort study was undertaken, including all patients in Region Västra Götaland, Sweden, who had undergone primary resection surgery for rectal cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2014, registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Data were retrieved from the registry and through review of the medical records.

RESULTS

In total, 1208 patients were included in the study of whom 78 (6%) developed local recurrence during the follow-up period of at least 5 years. Intraoperative adverse events were common and occurred in 62/78 (79%) of patients with local recurrence compared to 604/1130 (53%) of patients without local recurrence. In multivariate analysis intraoperative adverse events were found to be an independent risk factor for local recurrence of rectal cancer, as were nonradical resection, a high pathological T stage, the presence of lymph node metastases, type of surgery and refraining from rectal washout during anterior resection and Hartmann's procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative adverse events were found to be an independent risk factor for local recurrence of rectal cancer and could possibly be used together with other known risk factors to select patients for intensified postoperative surveillance.

Surgical Teams' Attitudes About Surgical Safety and the Surgical Safety Checklist at 10 Years: A Multinational Survey

To assess health care professionals' attitudes on the Surgical Safety Checklist ("the Checklist") in resource-rich health systems and provide insights on strategies for optimizing Checklist use.

Background

In use for over a decade, the Checklist is a safety instrument aimed at improving operating room communication, teamwork, and evidence-based safety practices.

Methods

An online survey was sent to surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists in 5 high-income countries (Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand). Survey results were analyzed using SPSS.

Results

A total of 2032 health care professionals completed the survey. Of these respondents, 47.6% were nurses, 70.5% were women, 65.1% were from the United States, and 50.0% had 20 years of experience or more in their role. Most respondents felt the Checklist positively impacted patient safety (70.9%), team communication (73.1%), and teamwork (58.9%). Only 50.3% of respondents were satisfied their team's use of the Checklist, and only 47.5% reported team members stopping to fully participate in the process. More nurses lacked confidence regarding their role in the Checklist process than surgeons and anesthesiologists combined (8.9% vs 4.3%). Fewer surgeons and anesthesiologists than nurses felt they received adequate training on the Checklist's use (57.8% vs 76.7%).

Conclusions

While most respondents perceive the Checklist as enhancing patient safety, not all surgical team members are actively engaging with its use. To enhance buy-in and meaningful use of the Checklist, health systems should provide more training on the Checklist with respect to its purpose and strengthening teamwork.

Errors in adult trauma resuscitation: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Trauma resuscitation at dedicated trauma centers typically consist of ad-hoc teams performing critical tasks in a time-limited manner. This creates a high stakes environment apt or avoidable errors. Reporting of errors in trauma resuscitation is generally center-dependent and lacks common terminology.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review by searching Ovid Medline, Scopus and Embase from inception to February 24, 2021 for errors in adult trauma resuscitation. English studies published after 2001 were included. Studies were assessed by two independent reviewers for meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. Errors were characterized from the included studies and a summary table was developed. Our review was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42020152875).

RESULTS

The literature search retrieved 4658 articles with 26 meeting eligibility criteria. Errors were identified by morbidity and mortality rounds or other committee in 62%, missed injuries on tertiary assessment or radiology review in 12%, deviations from algorithmic guidelines in 12% or predefined for chest tube complications, critical incident reporting, aspiration or delays in care. In total there were 39 unique error types identified and divided into 9 categories including Emergency Medical Services handover, airway, assessment of injuries, patient monitoring and access, transfusion/blood related, management of injuries, team communication/dynamics, procedure error and disposition.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our systematic review identified 39 unique error types in trauma resuscitation. Identifying these errors is imperative in developing systems for improvement of trauma care.

Technology integration in complex healthcare environments: A systematic literature review

To support safety and efficient care, effective integration of technology into the timepressured, high-risk healthcare environments is critical. This systematic literature review aimed to highlight the impact of technology on the physical environment as well as the facilitators for and barriers to technology integration into complex healthcare settings, including operating rooms and trauma rooms. PsycINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed databases were utilized, along with a hand search. PRISMA and MMAT guidelines were used for reporting and quality appraisal. Out of 1,001 articles, 20 were eligible. Identified categories included hybrid and integrated environments, technological ambiance, and information technologies. Technology integration has implications for direct patient care, efficiency, throughput, patient safety, teamwork, communication, and the perception of care. The facilitators for and barriers to technology integration included layout design, equipment positioning, and decluttering. The physical environment can improve the impact of technology on factors such as patient safety and efficiency.

Incorporating patient safety into early undergraduate medical education: teaching medical students to perform surgical time outs during anatomy

OBJECTIVES

To introduce surgical safety checklists and time outs to future physicians through early incorporation of time outs in the first year gross anatomy course.

SETTING

The Wayne State University School of Medicine Anatomy Lab.

PARTICIPANTS

Approximately 300 first year medical students per year participated in the intervention.

INTERVENTIONS

An educational presentation on medical errors focusing on surgical errors was developed. Students in 2017-2018 viewed the presentation and completed two time outs, one with the first anatomy dissection and a second with the last dissection. Preintervention and postintervention surveys were completed and results compared. Students completed a second postintervention survey after the second time out. Students in 2018-2019 were asked to complete the time outs before every dissection. Time out procedure sheets were collected to determine completion rates. The intervention was further modified for academic year 2019-2020 and time out sheets were again collected.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Four domains of learning were surveyed: (1) major components and goals/limitations of universal protocol, (2) medical error lexicon, (3) components of a time out, and (4) confidence in completing time out checklists.

RESULTS

Postintervention surveys demonstrated significant improvement in each domain. Students found time outs easy to complete and developed confidence in performing time outs. Following a successful pilot, time outs were incorporated into every dissection. Students continued to perform this procedure despite absence of adverse consequences for not doing so.

CONCLUSION

Students found the time outs easy to complete and developed the confidence and ability to perform a surgical time out early in their medical education. The new skills, knowledge and attitudes that these medical students have developed will hopefully improve the care they provide to patients, thereby advancing the practice of quality improvement and patient safety in the clinical setting.

Development and Evaluation of a Novel Instrument to Measure Severity of Intraoperative Events Using Video Data

OBJECTIVE

To develop and evaluate a novel instrument to measure SEVERE processes using video data.

BACKGROUND

Surgical video data can serve an important role in understanding the relationship between intraoperative events and postoperative outcomes. However, a standard tool to measure severity of intraoperative events is not yet available.

METHODS

Items to be included in the instrument were identified through literature and video reviews. A committee of experts guided item reduction, including pilot tests and revisions, and determined weighted scores. Content validity was evaluated using a validated sensibility questionnaire. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficient. Construct validity was evaluated on a sample of 120 patients who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure, in which comprehensive video data was obtained.

RESULTS

SEVERE index measures severity of 5 event types using ordinal scales. Each intraoperative event is given a weighted score out of 10. Inter-rater reliability was excellent [0.87 (95%-confidence interval, 0.77-0.92)]. In a sample of consecutive 120 patients undergoing gastric bypass procedures, a median of 12 events [interquartile range (IQR) 9-18] occurred per patient and bleeding was the most frequent type (median 10, IQR 7-14). The median SEVERE score per case was 11.3 (IQR 8.3-16.9). In risk-adjusted multivariable regression models, history of previous abdominal surgery (P = 0.02) and body mass index (P = 0.005) were associated with SEVERE scores, demonstrating construct validity evidence.

CONCLUSION

The SEVERE index may prove to be a useful instrument in identifying patients with high risk of developing postoperative complications.

World Cleft Coalition International Treatment Program Standards

OBJECTIVE

To present preliminary efforts to establish an internationally agreed set of minimum core practice and best practice guidelines, along with overarching principles to promote safe and comprehensive cleft care globally.

DESIGN

Representatives from 6 national and international organizations collaborated to form a World Cleft Coalition. Representatives met monthly/bimonthly to compile standards for safe, comprehensive, and sustainable cleft care. Outcomes were circulated within each organization and to a small subset of external constituents for feedback.

RESULTS

A series of overarching principles were established for those involved in International Cleft Treatment Programs, based on the experience of participating organizations. The overarching principles are followed by a structured and detailed Recommended Practice for Ensuring Safe, Comprehensive and Sustainable Cleft Care, which includes minimum core and best practice for the following areas: surgical safety, quality control, patient education, patient selection, patient follow-up, comprehensive care, partnership with the host nations and professionals, training and exchanges for sustainability, and local capacity building.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes aimed to provide a working document to define core principles for safe comprehensive cleft care, while balancing various levels of resources, geographic locations, appropriately trained health care professional specialists, and training limitations. The study highlights the process and benefits to a collaborative international working group not only to establish best practice but also to solicit and engage others in discussion of their experiences with building and supporting safe, high-quality, comprehensive, sustainable, worldwide cleft care.

Assessment of 3-Dimensional vs 2-Dimensional Imaging and Technical Performance Using a Multiport Intraoperative Data Capture and Analytic System for Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Surgery

IMPORTANCE

Errors and adverse events occur frequently in health care. Three-dimensional (3-D) laparoscopic systems claim to provide more realistic depth perception and better spatial orientation compared with their 2-D counterparts.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the association of 3-D vs 2-D systems with technical performance during laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) procedures using a multiport intraoperative data capture system.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study was performed between May and December 2018, with a total of 50 LRYGB procedures performed in an academic tertiary care center; recordings of the operations were evaluated with a 30-day follow-up. All procedures were performed by the same surgical team.

EXPOSURE

Surgical teams used 2-D or 3-D laparoscopic systems.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Technical performance was evaluated using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill and surgical errors and events using the Generic Error Rating Tool.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients who underwent LRYGB procedures, 42 (86%) were women, with a median (interquartile range) age of 42 (35-47) years and a median (interquartile range) body mass index of 46 (42-48), with no significant demographic differences between the groups whose operations were performed using the 2-D and 3-D systems. The mean (SD) number of errors per case was significantly lower in procedures using the 3-D laparoscopic system than in those using the 2-D system (17 [6] vs 33 [2]; P < .001). The mean (SD) number of error-related events was significantly lower in procedures using the 3-D system than in those using the 2-D system (6 [2] vs 11 [4]; P < .001). Mean (SD) Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill scores were significantly higher when the 3-D system was used than when the 2-D system was used (28 [4] vs 22 [3]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this limited sample of LRYGB procedures, the use of a 3-D laparoscopic system was associated with a statistically significant reduction in errors and events as well as higher Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill scores compared with 2-D systems.