Safety in the operating room during orthopedic trauma surgery—incidence of adverse events related to technical equipment and logistics

Abstract

Background Safety in the operating room is widely debated. Adverse events during surgery are potentially dangerous for the patient and staff. The incidence of adverse events during orthopedic trauma surgery is unknown. Therefore, we performed a study to quantify the incidence of these adverse events. Primary objective was to determine the incidence of adverse events related to technical equipment and logistics. The secondary objective was to evaluate the consequences of these adverse events. Methods We completed a cross-sectional observational study to assess the incidence, consequences and preventability of adverse events related to technical equipment and logistics during orthopedic trauma surgery. During a 10 week period, all orthopedic trauma operations were evaluated by an observer. Six types of procedures were differentiated: osteosynthesis; arthroscopy; removal of hardware; joint replacement; bone grafting and other. Adverse events were divided in six categories: staff dependent factors; patient dependent factors; anaesthesia; imaging equipment; operation room equipment and instruments and implants. Adverse events were defined as any factor affecting the surgical procedure in a negative way. Results Hundred-fifty operative procedures were included. In 54% of the procedures, at least one adverse event occurred. In total, 147 adverse events occurred, with a range of 1-5 per procedure. Most adverse events occurred during joint replacement procedures. Thirty-seven percent of the incidents concerned defect, incorrect connected or absent instruments. In 36% of the procedures adverse events resulted in a prolonged operation time with a median prolongation of 10.0 min. Conclusion In more than half of orthopedic trauma surgical procedures adverse events related to technical equipment and logistics occurred, most of them could easily be prevented. These adverse events could endanger the safety of the patient and staff and should therefore be reduced. Level of evidence 4.

A Network Analysis of Perioperative Communication Patterns

“…A review of 25 studies investigating the incidence of adverse events between 1991 and 2017 in 27 countries showed that 51.2% (range, 34.3% to 83%) were preventable . Although the incidence of reported surgical adverse events may vary, a 2018 study at a Level 1 trauma center in Amsterdam showed that “146 [(99.3%)] out of 147 adverse events were not described in the operation report.” (p461)…”

What can surgery learn from other high-performance disciplines?

“…Despite these known benefits, it is important to acknowledge that successful checklist usage requires high compliance rates and must be appropriate for the environments in which they are implemented since the type and frequency of errors are not homogenous throughout all surgical specialties. For instance, equipment-related errors occur more often in specialties that rely heavily on technology such as orthopaedic surgery [18]. Therefore, these checklists should include items addressing the main categories of equipment problems: availability, configuration and settings and malfunctioning/failure then modified to reflect the technology of the procedure [19].…”

Self-Learning Methodology in Simulated Environments (MAES©) as a Learning Tool in Perioperative Nursing. An Evidence-Based Practice Model for Acquiring Clinical Safety Competencies

“…This report guided the quality policies of the main international health organization for the development of strategies and recommendations that promoted the control of inevitable damages. This became especially important in the field of surgery, due to the complexity and risks of the perioperative process [2,3], and this is what the World Health Organization (WHO) campaign" Safe Surgery Saves Lives" is based on.…”