Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42251210›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2026

Responding to Surgical Errors: From Psychological Impact to Disclosure-A Systematic Review.

Isolde M Busch, Veronica Marinelli, Olga Maggioni, Chiara Leardini, Albert W Wu, Mariangela Mazzi, Loretta Berti, Marc G Besselink, Roberto Salvia, Michela Rimondini

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Isolde M BuschDepartment of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Veronica MarinelliDepartment of Engineering for Innovation Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Olga MaggioniDepartment of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. olga.maggioni@univr.it.
Chiara LeardiniDepartment of Management, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Albert W WuDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mariangela MazziDepartment of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Loretta BertiDepartment of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Marc G BesselinkDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Roberto SalviaDepartment of Engineering for Innovation Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Michela RimondiniDepartment of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransparent management and disclosure of surgical errors and adverse events (AE) are essential for patient safety and staff well-being. This systematic review synthesizes evidence on how surgical errors and AE are experienced and disclosed, focusing on their psychological impact on clinicians, coping strategies, support resources, and barriers to disclosure. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic search of PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and WoS Core Collection was conducted without date restrictions, using also additional sources and automatic alerts. Two reviewers independently screened studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. Findings were synthesized narratively.

resultsA total of 30 studies involving 11,723 participants were included. Surgical staff reported significant emotional distress following AE, with guilt (53-89%) and anxiety (45-88%) commonly reported and up to 96% experiencing some emotional impact. Coping strategies varied, while formal psychological support was rarely (1.6-7%) accessed. Reporting and disclosure practices were inconsistent, with disclosure rates ranging from 17 to 62%. Major barriers included fear of litigation, unclear institutional procedures, and hierarchical pressures. Although disclosure was widely recognized as ethically correct, individual and systemic obstacles persisted. Training interventions improved communication skills, but gaps remained.

conclusionsThis systematic review highlights the substantial psychological impact of surgical errors and AE on clinicians, underscoring the need for organizational strategies that protect staff well-being. Evidence directly addressing psychological factors involved in disclosure remains limited. Clearer disclosure protocols, enhanced communication training, and accessible psychological support may reduce distress among surgical staff and promote transparent, patient-centered error management, particularly in complex surgical fields such as oncological care.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalDisclosureMedical ErrorsSurgeonsTruth DisclosureCoping SkillsHumansAdverse eventsDisclosureErrorsSurgeryWell-being

Identifiers

PMID42251210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.