James J Jung1,2,3, Jonah Elfassy4, Peter Jüni5,6, Teodor Grantcharov4,7,5. 1. International Centre for Surgical Safety, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, 8th Floor East, Toronto, ON, M5B 1T8, Canada. jungj@smh.ca. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. jungj@smh.ca. 3. Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. jungj@smh.ca. 4. International Centre for Surgical Safety, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, 8th Floor East, Toronto, ON, M5B 1T8, Canada. 5. Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 6. Applied Health Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 7. Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adverse events occur commonly in the operating room (OR) and often contribute to morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare spending. Validated frameworks to measure and report postoperative outcomes have long existed to facilitate exchanges of structured information pertaining to postoperative complication rates in order to improve patient safety. However, systematic evidence regarding measurement and reporting of intraoperative adverse events (iAE) is still lacking. METHODS: We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles published up to June 2016 that measured and reported iAE. We presented the terms and definitions used to describe iAE. We identified the types of reported iAE and summarized them into discrete categories. We reported frequencies of iAE by detection methods. RESULTS: Of the 47 included studies, 30 were cross-sectional, 14 were case-series, and 3 were cohort studies. The studies used 16 different terms and 22 unique definitions to describe 74 types of iAE. Frequencies of iAE appeared to vary depending on the detection methods, with higher numbers reported when direct observation in the OR was used to detect iAE. Twenty studies assessed severity of iAE, which were mostly based on whether they resulted in postoperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study systematically reviewed the current evidence on prevalence and characteristics of iAE that were detected by direct observation, reviews of patient charts, administrative data and incident reports, and surveys and interviews of healthcare providers. Our findings suggest that direct observation method has the most potential to identify and characterize iAE in detail.
BACKGROUND: Adverse events occur commonly in the operating room (OR) and often contribute to morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare spending. Validated frameworks to measure and report postoperative outcomes have long existed to facilitate exchanges of structured information pertaining to postoperative complication rates in order to improve patient safety. However, systematic evidence regarding measurement and reporting of intraoperative adverse events (iAE) is still lacking. METHODS: We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles published up to June 2016 that measured and reported iAE. We presented the terms and definitions used to describe iAE. We identified the types of reported iAE and summarized them into discrete categories. We reported frequencies of iAE by detection methods. RESULTS: Of the 47 included studies, 30 were cross-sectional, 14 were case-series, and 3 were cohort studies. The studies used 16 different terms and 22 unique definitions to describe 74 types of iAE. Frequencies of iAE appeared to vary depending on the detection methods, with higher numbers reported when direct observation in the OR was used to detect iAE. Twenty studies assessed severity of iAE, which were mostly based on whether they resulted in postoperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study systematically reviewed the current evidence on prevalence and characteristics of iAE that were detected by direct observation, reviews of patient charts, administrative data and incident reports, and surveys and interviews of healthcare providers. Our findings suggest that direct observation method has the most potential to identify and characterize iAE in detail.
Authors: S L Mason; S Kuruvilla; C V Riga; M S Gohel; M Hamady; N J Cheshire; C D Bicknell Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2013-01-08 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Nicolas Dea; Anne Versteeg; Charles Fisher; Adrienne Kelly; Dennis Hartig; Michael Boyd; Scott Paquette; Brian K Kwon; Marcel Dvorak; John Street Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2014-08-22
Authors: Lisa M McElroy; Amna Daud; Brittany Lapin; Olivia Ross; Donna M Woods; Anton I Skaro; Jane L Holl; Daniela P Ladner Journal: Surgery Date: 2014-10-17 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: D W Bates; N Spell; D J Cullen; E Burdick; N Laird; L A Petersen; S D Small; B J Sweitzer; L L Leape Journal: JAMA Date: 1997 Jan 22-29 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: K R Catchpole; A E B Giddings; M R de Leval; G J Peek; P J Godden; M Utley; S Gallivan; G Hirst; T Dale Journal: Ergonomics Date: 2006 Apr 15-May 15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Abdul-Rahman M Suleiman; Daniel Amarasinghe; Priya Kathuria; Jacob Vandel; Jordan Holloway; Kenneth Elkin; Paul Walker; Diane Levine Journal: BMJ Open Qual Date: 2021-03
Authors: Michael Eppler; Aref S Sayegh; Mitchell Goldenberg; Tamir Sholklapper; Sij Hemal; Giovanni E Cacciamani Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 4.964