Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646381›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2018

Assessment of Incorrect Surgical Procedures Within and Outside the Operating Room: A Follow-up Study From US Veterans Health Administration Medical Centers.

Julia Neily, Christina Soncrant, Peter D Mills, Douglas E Paull, Lisa Mazzia, Yinong Young-Xu, William Nylander, Marilyn M Lynn, William Gunnar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Julia NeilyNational Center for Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, White River Junction, Vermont.
Christina SoncrantNational Center for Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, White River Junction, Vermont.
Peter D MillsNational Center for Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, White River Junction, Vermont.
Douglas E PaullNational Center for Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, White River Junction, Vermont.
Lisa MazziaNational Center for Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, White River Junction, Vermont.
Yinong Young-XuNational Center for Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, White River Junction, Vermont.
William NylanderNational Surgery Office, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC.
Marilyn M LynnNational Surgery Office, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC.
William GunnarNational Surgery Office, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC.
Veterans Health Administration · USNational Patient Safety Foundation · USUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Reducing wrong-site surgery is fundamental to safe, high-quality care. This is a follow-up study examining 8 years of reported surgical adverse events and root causes in the nation's largest integrated health care system. Objectives: To provide a follow-up description of incorrect surgical procedures reported from 2010 to 2017 from US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical centers, compared with the previous studies of 2001 to 2006 and 2006 to 2009, and to recommend actions for future prevention of such events. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study describes patient safety adverse events and close calls reported from 86 VHA medical centers from the approximately 130 VHA facilities with a surgical program. The surgical procedures and programs vary in size and complexity from small rural centers to large, complex urban facilities. Procedures occurring between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were included. Data analysis took place in 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The categories of incorrect procedure types were wrong patient, side, site (including wrong-level spine), procedure, or implant. Events included those in or out of the operating room, adverse events or close calls, surgical specialty, and harm. These results were compared with the previous studies of VHA-reported wrong-site surgery (2001-2006 and 2006-2009). Results: Our review produced 483 reports (277 adverse events and 206 close calls). The rate of in-operating room (in-OR) reported adverse events with harm has continued to trend downward from 1.74 to 0.47 reported adverse events with harm per 100 000 procedures between 2000 and 2017 based on 6 591 986 in-OR procedures. When in-OR events were examined by discipline as a rate, dentistry had 1.54, neurosurgery had 1.53, and ophthalmology had 1.06 reported in-OR adverse events per 10 000 cases. The overall VHA in-OR rate for adverse events during 2010 to 2017 was 0.53 per 10 000 procedures based on 3 234 514 in-OR procedures. The most common root cause for adverse events was related to issues in performing a comprehensive time-out (28.4%). In these cases, the time-out either was conducted incorrectly or was incomplete in some way. Conclusions and Relevance: Over the period studied, the VHA identified a decrease in the rate of reported adverse events in the OR associated with harm and continued reporting of adverse event close calls. Organizational efforts continue to examine root cause analysis reports, promulgate lessons learned, and enhance policy to promote a culture and behavior that minimizes events and is transparent in reporting occurrences.

Indexed as

Medical ErrorsFollow-Up StudiesHumansPatient SafetyQuality of Health CareUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans AffairsVeterans Health

Identifiers

PMID30646381
PMCPMC6324368
OpenAlexW2902458823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.