ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2024
The application of human reliability analysis to carpal tunnel decompression.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMany surgical procedures are prone to human error, particularly in the learning phase of skills acquisition. Task standardisation has been suggested as an approach to reducing errors, but it fails to account for the human factors associated with learning. Human reliability analysis (HRA) is a structured approach to assess human error during surgery. This study used HRA methodologies to examine skills acquisition associated with carpal tunnel decompression.
methodsThe individual steps or subtasks required to complete a carpal tunnel decompression were identified using hierarchical task analysis (HTA). The systematic human error reduction and prediction approach (SHERPA) was carried out by consensus of subject matter experts. This identified the potential human errors at each subgoal, the level of risk associated with each task and how these potential errors could be prevented.
resultsCarpal tunnel decompression was broken down into 46 subtasks, of which 21 (45%) were medium risk and 25 (55%) were low risk. Of the 46 subtasks, 4 (9%) were assigned high probability and 18 (39%) were assigned medium probability. High probability errors (>1/50 cases) included selecting incorrect tourniquet size, failure to infiltrate local anaesthetic in a proximal-to-distal direction and completion of the World Health Organization (WHO) surgical sign-out. Three (6%) of the subtasks were assigned high criticality, which included failure to aspirate before anaesthetic injection, whereas 21 (45%) were assigned medium criticality. Remedial strategies for each potential error were devised.
conclusionsThe use of HRA techniques provides surgeons with a platform to identify critical steps that are prone to error. This approach may improve surgical training and enhance patient safety.
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.