ReviewPatient safety in surgery2021
Risk factors and preventive strategies for unintentionally retained surgical sharps: a systematic review.
Review in Patient safety in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blunt versus sharp expansion of uterine incision during lower segment cesarean section.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Trial
- Repurposing a commercial artificial intelligence vision platform for automated surgical instrument identification: a proof-of-concept study.Patient safety in surgery · 2026Article
- Preventing Retained Surgical Items Through the Development of a Safer Telescopic Sponge-Counting System.AORN journal · 2026Article
- Surgical Counts.AORN journal · 2026Article
- Gossypiboma persists - A case series & literature review highlighting the clinical spectrum, diagnostic dilemmas, and surgical outcomes from a single tertiary care centre.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Gossypiboma-associated sarcomas in five cases.The Journal of small animal practice · 2026Article
- The safety of radiofrequency surgical sponges in orthopedic surgery: a validation study in 2,251 arthroplasty procedures.Patient safety in surgery · 2026Article
- Unintentionally retained surgical gauze presenting as chronic infected fistula to the surgical wound: a report of two cases.Patient safety in surgery · 2025Article
- Incidence and risk factors for nursing-related intraoperative incidents: A 5-year retrospective study at a Japanese tertiary care hospital.Japan journal of nursing science : JJNS · 2025Observational
- Article
- Safety Culture and Human Factors in Foreign Object Management in Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Trans-visceral Migration of Retained Gauze: A Rare Cause of Intestinal ObstructionBalkan medical journal · 2025Article
- A Patient With Pain After the Dentist.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Review
- Review
- Delayed Diagnosis of Retained Surgical Blade 12 Years Post-Hysterectomy: A Rare Case Report.Case reports in surgery · 2025Article
- Case Report: A Painful Twist of Fate Due to Intra-abdominal Textiloma.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Systematic Risk Analysis and Mitigation Strategies for Near-Miss Events in Interventional Operating Room Nursing.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Lost and found: trends in litigation and compensation related to retained surgical foreign bodies.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA retained surgical item (RSI) is defined as a never-event and can have drastic consequences on patient, provider, and hospital. However, despite increased efforts, RSI events remain the number one sentinel event each year. Hard foreign bodies (e.g. surgical sharps) have experienced a relative increase in total RSI events over the past decade. Despite this, there is a lack of literature directed towards this category of RSI event. Here we provide a systematic review that focuses on hard RSIs and their unique challenges, impact, and strategies for prevention and management.
methodsMultiple systematic reviews on hard RSI events were performed and reported using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) guidelines. Database searches were limited to the last 10 years and included surgical "sharps," a term encompassing needles, blades, instruments, wires, and fragments. Separate systematic review was performed for each subset of "sharps". Reviewers applied reciprocal synthesis and refutational synthesis to summarize the evidence and create a qualitative overview.
resultsIncreased vigilance and improved counting are not enough to eliminate hard RSI events. The accurate reporting of all RSI events and near miss events is a critical step in determining ways to prevent RSI events. The implementation of new technologies, such as barcode or RFID labelling, has been shown to improve patient safety, patient outcomes, and to reduce costs associated with retained soft items, while magnetic retrieval devices, sharp detectors and computer-assisted detection systems appear to be promising tools for increasing the success of metallic RSI recovery.
conclusionThe entire healthcare system is negatively impacted by a RSI event. A proactive multimodal approach that focuses on improving team communication and institutional support system, standardizing reports and implementing new technologies is the most effective way to improve the management and prevention of RSI events.
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.