ArticleAsian spine journal2022
"Spine Surgery Checklist": A Step towards Perfection through Protocols.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From error to prevention of wrong-level spine surgery: a review.Patient safety in surgery · 2025Review
- Development of the scoliosis research society spinal deformity surgery safety checklist.Spine deformity · 2025Article
- Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Postoperative Infection Rates of Blood Transfusion in Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Spine Pathways and the Role of Perioperative Checklists.Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery · 2024Article
- Intraoperative practices to prevent wrong-level spine surgery: a survey among 105 spine surgeons in the United Kingdom.Patient safety in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designA retrospective study. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a novel checklist that was designed specifically for the "spine-surgerysubspecialty" to reduce the incidence of some common preventable human errors and major perioperative complications in spine surgery. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: We propose a unique spine surgery-specific checklist that recognizes the risk factors, anticipates the possible human errors, and thus helps in preventing these errors. This checklist is associated with increased patient safety awareness, improved communication (keeps everyone updated regarding their responsibilities), reduction in the surgical claims, and reduction in the number of postoperative complications, including mortality.
methodsThis retrospective pilot study was performed at single center on 858 spine surgery patients. The patients were divided into the following two groups: the study group (after implementation of the checklist [2016-2017]) and the control group (before the implementation of the checklist [2015-2016]). The incidence of common preventable human errors and major perioperative complications in spine surgeries were recorded and compared between the two groups.
resultsThe prevalence of wrong-level surgeries was 0%, and the overall prevalence of the preventable errors was 1.63% (7/428). The rate of adverse, near-miss, and no-harm events was 0.23% (1/428), 0.70% (3/428) and 0.70% (3/428), respectively. The preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative errors were 0.70% (3/428), 0.23% (1/428), and 0.70 (3/428), respectively. The reoperation rate related to preventable errors reduced after the checklist was used. There were significant differences in the total preventable errors related to complications, such as infections, prolonged hospital stays, and unplanned hospital readmission/revision surgeries (p=0.001).
conclusionsThe authors propose the first-of-its kind spine surgery-specific checklist that is comprehensive and involves perioperative parameters. The checklist is easy to use, safe, and effective for reducing the unforgiving errors and perioperative complications. However, its broader implementation would require validation in large, multi-center, randomized control studies.
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.