ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2015
Applying fault tree analysis to the prevention of wrong-site surgery.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of Surgical Mortalities Using the Fishbone Model for Quality Improvement in Surgical Disciplines.World journal of surgery · 2022Article
- Analysis and outcomes of wrong site thyroid surgery.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- Our first review: an evaluation of effectiveness of root cause analysis recommendations in Hong Kong public hospitals.BMC health services research · 2020Review
- Fault Tree Analysis.American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical QualityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wrong-site surgery (WSS) is a rare event that occurs to hundreds of patients each year. Despite national implementation of the Universal Protocol over the past decade, development of effective interventions remains a challenge. We performed a systematic review of the literature reporting root causes of WSS and used the results to perform a fault tree analysis to assess the reliability of the system in preventing WSS and identifying high-priority targets for interventions aimed at reducing WSS. Process components where a single error could result in WSS were labeled with OR gates; process aspects reinforced by verification were labeled with AND gates. The overall redundancy of the system was evaluated based on prevalence of AND gates and OR gates. In total, 37 studies described risk factors for WSS. The fault tree contains 35 faults, most of which fall into five main categories. Despite the Universal Protocol mandating patient verification, surgical site signing, and a brief time-out, a large proportion of the process relies on human transcription and verification. Fault tree analysis provides a standardized perspective of errors or faults within the system of surgical scheduling and site confirmation. It can be adapted by institutions or specialties to lead to more targeted interventions to increase redundancy and reliability within the preoperative process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.