ArticleCureus2025
Assessing Perioperative Anesthesia Safety in Urological Surgeries: A Comprehensive Study of Critical Incidents.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
Background Anesthesia-related critical incidents are significant causes of preventable harm during surgeries, particularly in specialized fields such as urology as they pose unique challenges, including advanced patient age, comorbidities, and complex procedures, which heighten anesthesia-related risks. These incidents are influenced by human errors, patient factors, and procedural complexity. Despite global advancements in safety protocols, there remains a need for standardized reporting and analysis of such incidents, especially in low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods A prospective and retrospective observational study was conducted from 2019 to 2022. Data was collected from the anesthesia database and perioperative records of 2,541 patients who underwent urological surgeries. Two hundred forty-one (9.48%) patients experienced critical incidents. Data included patient demographics such as age and gender, comorbidities, surgery details, and the timing and recognition of incidents. Incidents were divided into cardiovascular, respiratory, airway, central nervous system (CNS), and miscellaneous categories. A root cause analysis identified human and systemic factors. Results The incidence rate of critical incidents was 9.83%. The most common age group was 31-40 years (20.75%), and 71.36% of patients were men. Most incidents occurred in American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grade I patients (58.09%) and during the induction phase of anesthesia (41.49%). Cardiovascular incidents were the most frequent (23.24%), followed by airway issues (12.86%). Human factors, such as the lack of skill (43.98%), vigilance (22.41%), and judgment (16.18%), were the leading causes. Surgical position, especially lithotomy, was significantly associated with incidents (p<0.0001), and a significant association between the time to recognition of an incident and the mode of recognition of the incident was also found (p<0.0001). Notably, 98.75% of incidents were deemed preventable with existing protocols. Conclusion Human factors, especially the lack of skill, vigilance, and judgment, emerged as the primary contributors to critical incidents in anesthetic procedures. Emphasizing improved training, vigilance during induction, and attention to patient positioning can enhance patient safety. Most incidents were preventable, highlighting the need for better reporting and preventive protocols.
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.