Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31197439›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2019

Adverse Events in the Operating Room: Definitions, Prevalence, and Characteristics. A Systematic Review.

James J Jung, Jonah Elfassy, Peter Jüni, Teodor Grantcharov

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

James J JungInternational 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.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1133-6322
Jonah ElfassyInternational Centre for Surgical Safety, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, 8th Floor East, Toronto, ON, M5B 1T8, Canada.
Peter JüniInstitute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Teodor GrantcharovInternational Centre for Surgical Safety, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, 8th Floor East, Toronto, ON, M5B 1T8, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse 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.

methodsWe 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.

resultsOf 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.

conclusionsThis 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.

Indexed as

Operating RoomsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsPrevalence

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.