ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2023
A distractions capture tool for cardiac surgery and lung transplantation: impact on outcomes.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Avoiding Unintended Consequences of Pediatric Blood Order Set Updates through In Situ Usability Testing.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSurgical distractions are associated with worse patient outcomes. Lung transplantation and cardiac surgery's multi-disciplinary nature, and their inherent complexities render them more vulnerable to distractions. We aim to use a novel distractions capture tool to evaluate the severity of distractions during cardiac surgery (CS) and lung transplantation (LTx) and assess its impact on post-operative complications.
methodsA prospective 'blinded' study was undertaken by direct observation of distractions during CS and LTx. Events were identified using the Imperial College Error Capture tool (ICECAP). Number and severity of distractions were correlated with post-operative outcomes (ICU & hospital stay, bleeding and anastomotic complications).
resultsIn LTx, we observed 2059 distractions within 287 h across 41 surgeries. In CS, we observed 1089 distractions within 192 h across 62 surgeries. Surgeons were consciously aware of 19.2% (LTx) and 21.3% (CS) of recorded events. Distractions consisted of procedure-independent pressures (61% LTx vs 56% CS), equipment problems (15% LTx vs 23%CS), communication (12% LTx vs 12% CS), technical problems or patient safety concerns (12% LTx vs 9% CS). In CS, 91% of procedure-independent pressures were non-operative distractions whilst LTx recorded 83%. Staff absences at a critical moment of surgery were recorded at 9% (LTx) and 7% (CS). The number and severity of distractions correlated with bleeding (CS p < 0.001, LTx p < 0.01), prolonged ICU stay (CS p = 0.002, LTx p = 0.002), hospital stay (CS p < 0.001) and anastomotic complications(LTx p < 0.03).
conclusionsICECAP as a novel surgical distractions capture tool was effective & applicable to both elective cardiac and urgent transplant surgeries. Surgeons were unaware of a large number of distractions & interruptions. Distractions were associated with longer ICU stay and higher rate of bleeding.
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.