Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2012

Open Access 01-02-2012

Risk factors in patient safety: minimally invasive surgery versus conventional surgery

Authors: Sharon P. Rodrigues, Aurystella M. Wever, Jenny Dankelman, Frank W. Jansen

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to identify the frequency of events in the different patient safety risk domains during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional surgery (CS).

Methods

A convenience sample of gynecologic MIS and CS was observed. Events were observed and categorized into one of the predefined patient safety risk domains.

Results

A total of 53 procedures were observed: 26 CS and 27 MIS procedures. The general characteristics were comparable between the two groups. A large number of environmental events were observed, averaging one every 2.5 min. Technical events and events of an organizational nature occurred more often in MIS (P < 0.01) than in CS (P < 0.01). The relative risk for the occurrence of one or more technical events in MIS compared with CS was 1.7, and the risk for two or more technical events was 4.1. A time out according to protocol showed no relationship to the occurrence of the different types of patient safety-related events.

Conclusion

The technological complexity inherent in MIS makes this type of surgery more prone to technology-related problems than CS, even in a specially designed minimally invasive surgical suite. A regular time-out procedure developed for CS lacks the attention necessary for the complex technology used in MIS and therefore is insufficient for MIS procedures briefing. Incorporating a specially designed technology checklist in a regular briefing protocol could be a solution to decrease the number of events in MIS.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldsen MS (1999) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academy Press, Washington Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldsen MS (1999) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academy Press, Washington
2.
go back to reference De Bruijne MC, Zegers M, Hoonhout LH, Wagner C (2007) Onbedoelde schade in Nederlandse ziekenhuizen. Dossieronderzoek van ziekenhuisopnames in 2004. EMGO Instituut/VUmc en NIVEL, Amsterdam/Utrecht De Bruijne MC, Zegers M, Hoonhout LH, Wagner C (2007) Onbedoelde schade in Nederlandse ziekenhuizen. Dossieronderzoek van ziekenhuisopnames in 2004. EMGO Instituut/VUmc en NIVEL, Amsterdam/Utrecht
3.
go back to reference de Vries EN, Ramrattan MA, Smorenburg SM, Gouma DJ, Boermeester MA (2008) The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care 3:216–223CrossRef de Vries EN, Ramrattan MA, Smorenburg SM, Gouma DJ, Boermeester MA (2008) The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care 3:216–223CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Inspectie voor de gezondheidszorg (2007) Risico’s minimaal invasieve chirurgie onderschat, kwaliteitssysteem voor laparoscopische operaties ontbreekt. IGZ, Den Haag Inspectie voor de gezondheidszorg (2007) Risico’s minimaal invasieve chirurgie onderschat, kwaliteitssysteem voor laparoscopische operaties ontbreekt. IGZ, Den Haag
5.
go back to reference Dankelman J, Grimbergen CA (2005) Systems approach to reduce errors in surgery. Surg Endosc 8:1017–1021CrossRef Dankelman J, Grimbergen CA (2005) Systems approach to reduce errors in surgery. Surg Endosc 8:1017–1021CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Calland JF, Guerlain S, Adams RB, Tribble CG, Foley E, Chekan EG (2002) A systems approach to surgical safety. Surg Endosc 6:1005–1014CrossRef Calland JF, Guerlain S, Adams RB, Tribble CG, Foley E, Chekan EG (2002) A systems approach to surgical safety. Surg Endosc 6:1005–1014CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi AW (2004) Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg 4:475–482CrossRef Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi AW (2004) Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg 4:475–482CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Leake PA, Urbach DR (2010) Measuring processes of care in general surgery: assessment of technical and nontechnical skills. Surg Innov 17(4):332–339PubMedCrossRef Leake PA, Urbach DR (2010) Measuring processes of care in general surgery: assessment of technical and nontechnical skills. Surg Innov 17(4):332–339PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Herron DM, Gagner M, Kenyon TL, Swanstrom LL (2001) The minimally invasive surgical suite enters the 21st century: a discussion of critical design elements. Surg Endosc 4:415–422CrossRef Herron DM, Gagner M, Kenyon TL, Swanstrom LL (2001) The minimally invasive surgical suite enters the 21st century: a discussion of critical design elements. Surg Endosc 4:415–422CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kenyon TA, Urbach DR, Speer JB, Waterman-Hukari B, Foraker GF, Hansen PD, Swanstrom LL (2001) Dedicated minimally invasive surgery suites increase operating room efficiency. Surg Endosc 10:1140–1143CrossRef Kenyon TA, Urbach DR, Speer JB, Waterman-Hukari B, Foraker GF, Hansen PD, Swanstrom LL (2001) Dedicated minimally invasive surgery suites increase operating room efficiency. Surg Endosc 10:1140–1143CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1994) Report of the RCOG working party on training in gynaecological endoscopic surgery. RCOG, London Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1994) Report of the RCOG working party on training in gynaecological endoscopic surgery. RCOG, London
12.
go back to reference Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat AH, Dellinger EP, Herbosa T, Joseph S, Kibatala PL, Lapitan MC, Merry AF, Moorthy K, Reznick RK, Taylor B, Gawande AA (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360(5):491–499PubMedCrossRef Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat AH, Dellinger EP, Herbosa T, Joseph S, Kibatala PL, Lapitan MC, Merry AF, Moorthy K, Reznick RK, Taylor B, Gawande AA (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360(5):491–499PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, van der Elst M, Karsten TM, Dankelman J (2007) Problems with technical equipment during laparoscopic surgery: an observational study. Surg Endosc 2:275–279CrossRef Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, van der Elst M, Karsten TM, Dankelman J (2007) Problems with technical equipment during laparoscopic surgery: an observational study. Surg Endosc 2:275–279CrossRef
14.
go back to reference de Vries EN, Prins HA, Crolla RM, den Outer AJ, van Andel G, van Helden SH, Schlack WS, van Putten MA, Gouma DJ, Dijkgraaf MG, Smorenburg SM, Boermeester MA (2010) Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med 20:1928–1937CrossRef de Vries EN, Prins HA, Crolla RM, den Outer AJ, van Andel G, van Helden SH, Schlack WS, van Putten MA, Gouma DJ, Dijkgraaf MG, Smorenburg SM, Boermeester MA (2010) Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med 20:1928–1937CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, Hoffmann WF, van der Elst M, Dankelman J (2008) Can a structured checklist prevent problems with laparoscopic equipment? Surg Endosc 10:2238–2243CrossRef Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, Hoffmann WF, van der Elst M, Dankelman J (2008) Can a structured checklist prevent problems with laparoscopic equipment? Surg Endosc 10:2238–2243CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Lynch RJ, Englesbe MJ, Sturm L, Bitar A, Budhiraj K, Kolla S, Polyachenko Y, Duck MG, Campbell DA Jr (2009) Measurement of foot traffic in the operating room: implications for infection control. Am J Med Qual 1:45–52 Lynch RJ, Englesbe MJ, Sturm L, Bitar A, Budhiraj K, Kolla S, Polyachenko Y, Duck MG, Campbell DA Jr (2009) Measurement of foot traffic in the operating room: implications for infection control. Am J Med Qual 1:45–52
17.
go back to reference Moorthy K, Munz Y, Undre S, Darzi A (2004) Objective evaluation of the effect of noise on the performance of a complex laparoscopic task. Surgery 1:25–30CrossRef Moorthy K, Munz Y, Undre S, Darzi A (2004) Objective evaluation of the effect of noise on the performance of a complex laparoscopic task. Surgery 1:25–30CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Pluyter JR, Buzink SN, Rutkowski AF, Jakimowicz JJ (2010) Do absorption and realistic distraction influence performance of component task surgical procedure? Surg Endosc 4:902–907CrossRef Pluyter JR, Buzink SN, Rutkowski AF, Jakimowicz JJ (2010) Do absorption and realistic distraction influence performance of component task surgical procedure? Surg Endosc 4:902–907CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Lingard L, Regehr G, Espin S, Whyte S (2006) A theory-based instrument to evaluate team communication in the operating room: balancing measurement authenticity and reliability. Qual Saf Health Care 6:422–426CrossRef Lingard L, Regehr G, Espin S, Whyte S (2006) A theory-based instrument to evaluate team communication in the operating room: balancing measurement authenticity and reliability. Qual Saf Health Care 6:422–426CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Lingard L, Espin S, Whyte S, Regehr G, Baker GR, Reznick R, Bohnen J, Orser B, Doran D, Grober E (2004) Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Qual Saf Health Care 5:330–334CrossRef Lingard L, Espin S, Whyte S, Regehr G, Baker GR, Reznick R, Bohnen J, Orser B, Doran D, Grober E (2004) Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Qual Saf Health Care 5:330–334CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Wiegmann DA, ElBardissi AW, Dearani JA, Daly RC, Sundt TM III (2007) Disruptions in surgical flow and their relationship to surgical errors: an exploratory investigation. Surgery 5:658–665CrossRef Wiegmann DA, ElBardissi AW, Dearani JA, Daly RC, Sundt TM III (2007) Disruptions in surgical flow and their relationship to surgical errors: an exploratory investigation. Surgery 5:658–665CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Parsons HM (1974) What happened at Hawthorne? New evidence suggests the Hawthorne effect resulted from operant reinforcement contingencies. Science 4128:922–932CrossRef Parsons HM (1974) What happened at Hawthorne? New evidence suggests the Hawthorne effect resulted from operant reinforcement contingencies. Science 4128:922–932CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Risk factors in patient safety: minimally invasive surgery versus conventional surgery
Authors
Sharon P. Rodrigues
Aurystella M. Wever
Jenny Dankelman
Frank W. Jansen
Publication date
01-02-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2012
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1874-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2012

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2012 Go to the issue