Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 8/2010

Open Access 01-08-2010

Risk-sensitive events during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the influence of the integrated operating room and a preoperative checklist tool

Authors: Sonja N. Buzink, Lotte van Lier, Ignace H. J. T. de Hingh, Jack J. Jakimowicz

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 8/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Awareness of the relative high rate of adverse events in laparoscopic surgery created a need to safeguard quality and safety of performance better. Technological innovations, such as integrated operating room (OR) systems and checklists, have the potential to improve patient safety, OR efficiency, and surgical outcomes. This study was designed to investigate the influence of the integrated OR system and Pro/cheQ, a digital checklist tool, on the number and type of equipment- and instrument-related risk-sensitive events (RSE) during laparoscopic cholecystectomies.

Methods

Forty-five laparoscopic cholecystectomies were analyzed on the number and type of RSE; 15 procedures were observed in the cart-based OR setting, 15 in an integrated OR setting, and 15 in the integrated OR setting while using Pro/cheQ.

Results

In the cart-based OR setting and the integrated OR setting, at least one event occurred in 87% of the procedures, which was reduced to 47% in the integrated OR setting when using Pro/cheQ. During 45 procedures a total of 57 RSE was observed—most were caused by equipment that was not switched on or with the wrong settings. In the integrated OR while using Pro/cheQ the number of RSE was reduced by 65%.

Conclusions

Using both an integrated OR and Pro/cheQ has a stronger reducing effect on the number of RSE than using an integrated OR alone. The Pro/cheQ tool supported the optimal workflow in a natural way and raised the general safety awareness amongst all members of the surgical team. For tools such as integrated OR systems and checklists to succeed it is pivotal not to underestimate the value of the implementation process. To further improve safety and quality of surgery, a multifaceted approach should be followed, focusing on the performance and competence of the surgical team as a whole.
Literature
1.
Moore M, Bennett C (1995) The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 170:55–59CrossRefPubMed
2.
Gallagher A, Smith C (2003) From the operating room of the present to the operating room of the future. Human-factors lessons learned from the minimally invasive surgery revolution. Semin Laparosc Surg 10:127–139PubMed
3.
Dincler S, Buchmann P (2004) Evaluation of operational skills by learning curve. Chir Gastroenterol 20:16–19CrossRef
4.
Catchpole K, Mishra A, Handa A, McCulloch P (2008) Teamwork and error in the operating room: analysis of skills and roles. Ann Surg 247:699–706CrossRefPubMed
5.
Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi AW (2004) Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg 239:475–482CrossRefPubMed
6.
Leape L (1994) The preventability of medical injury. In: Bogner M (ed) Human error in medicine. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 13–25
7.
8.
9.
Kenyon TAG, Urbach DR, Speer JB, Waterman-Hukari B, Foraker GF, Hansen PD, Swanström LL (2001) Dedicated minimally invasive surgery suites increase operating room efficiency. Surg Endosc 15:1140–1143CrossRefPubMed
10.
Alarcon A, Berguer R (1996) A comparison of operating room crowding between open and laparoscopic operations. Surg Endosc 10:916–919CrossRefPubMed
11.
Herron DM, Gagner M, Kenyon TL, Swanström LL (2001) The minimally invasive surgical suite enters the 21st century. Surg Endosc 15:415CrossRefPubMed
12.
Saufl NM (2004) Universal protocol for preventing wrong site, wrong procedure, wrong person surgery. J Perianesth Nurs 19:348–351CrossRefPubMed
13.
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 360:491–499CrossRefPubMed
14.
Lingard L, Regehr G, Orser B, Reznick R, Baker GR, Doran D, Espin S, Bohnen J, Whyte S (2008) Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication. Arch Surg 143:12–17CrossRefPubMed
15.
Nundy S, Mukherjee A, Sexton JB, Pronovost PJ, Knight A, Rowen LC, Duncan M, Syin D, Makary MA (2008) Impact of preoperative briefings on operating room delays: a preliminary report. Arch Surg 143:1068–1072CrossRefPubMed
16.
Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, Hoffmann WF, van der Elst M, Dankelman J (2008) Can a structured checklist prevent problems with laparoscopic equipment? Surg Endosc 22:2238–2243CrossRefPubMed
17.
van Lier L (2008) Design of a digital checklist interface for preparing laparoscopic procedures. MSc Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft
18.
Hertzum M, Jacobsen NE (2003) The evaluator effect: a chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. Int J Hum-Comput Int 15:183–204CrossRef
19.
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 21:275–279CrossRefPubMed
20.
Courdier S, Garbin O, Hummel M, Thoma V, Ball E, Favre R, Wattiez A (2009) Equipment failure: causes and consequences in endoscopic gynecologic surgery. J Minim Invas Gyn 16:28–33CrossRef
21.
22.
Metadata
Title
Risk-sensitive events during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the influence of the integrated operating room and a preoperative checklist tool
Authors
Sonja N. Buzink
Lotte van Lier
Ignace H. J. T. de Hingh
Jack J. Jakimowicz
Publication date
01-08-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 8/2010
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-0892-6

Other articles of this Issue 8/2010

Surgical Endoscopy 8/2010 Go to the issue

Letter

Re: Single incision multiport laparoendoscopic (SIMPLE) surgery

OriginalPaper

The impact of intraoperative ultrasonography on the surgical treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases

OriginalPaper

Stapled transanal rectal resection for symptomatic intussusception: morphological and functional outcome

OriginalPaper

Effort, safety, and findings of routine preoperative endoscopic evaluation of morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery

OriginalPaper

Comparison of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic-assisted hemicolectomy

OriginalPaper

Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy for primary palmar hyperidrosis