Patient Safety in Surgery最新文献

Background: Medical professionals are constantly exposed to bodily fluids and sanitizing agents during routine medical procedures. Unbeknownst to many healthcare workers, however, the barrier integrity of medical gloves can be altered when exposed to these substances, potentially resulting in exposure to dangerous pathogens.

Methods: This experimental study was designed to test the hypothesis that the durability of both natural and synthetic solvent-exposed medical gloves will be lower than the durability of the gloves in air. The testing consisted of a sample of commercially available medical gloves exposed to 70% ethanol, phosphate buffered saline, and deionized water, aimed at simulating the environments in which medical gloves are commonly worn. Gloves were included in this study based on their performance in previous durability studies in air. Data were collected over a period of three months. The glove assessment device automatically detects pinhole-sized perforations in medical gloves, eliminating the need to visually inspect each glove. Relative durability was measured as the average number of sandpaper touches until glove puncture.

Results: Four out of five glove brands performed better when exposed to all three solvents than in air, which is likely due to slippage in the interface between the wet glove and the sandpaper. Sensicare Micro, a polyisoprene surgical glove, had the most consistent durability in all three solvents tested. A two-way ANOVA revealed that both glove brand (P = 0.0001), solvent (P = 0.0001), and their interaction (P = 0.0040, α = 0.05) significantly affected average glove durability.

Conclusions: Glove durability did not remain consistent in 70% ethanol, phosphate buffered saline, deionized water, and air. These results make it clear that additional testing and labeling information would help healthcare workers select gloves for use in specific environments to ensure the best barrier protection against disease or toxins.

Background: Surgical patients are at risk of postoperative complications, which may lead to increased morbidity, mortality, hospital length-of-stay and healthcare costs. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) protocols are evidence-based and have demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing complications and associated consequences. However, their adoption in Australia has been limited and the reason for this is unclear. This study aimed to describe clinicians' perceptions of ERAS protocols in Australia.

Methods: A national online survey of anaesthetists, surgeons and nurses was undertaken. Invitations to participate were distributed via emails from professional colleges. The 30-item survey captured respondent characteristics, ERAS perceptions, beliefs, education and learning preferences and future planning considerations. The final question was open-ended for elaboration of perceptions of ERAS. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe and compare group differences across disciplines relative to perceptions of ERAS.

Results: The sample included 178 responses (116 nurses, 65.2%; 36 surgeons, 20.2%; 26 anaesthetists, 14.6%) across six states and two territories. More than half (n = 104; 58.8%) had used ERAS protocols in patient care, and most perceived they were 'very knowledgeable' (n = 24; 13.6%) or 'knowledgeable' (n = 71; 40.3%) of ERAS. However, fewer nurses had cared for a patient using ERAS (p <.01) and nurses reported lower levels of knowledge (p <.001) than their medical counterparts. Most respondents agreed ERAS protocols improved patient care and financial efficiency and were a reasonable time investment (overall Md 3-5), but nurses generally recorded lower levels of agreement (p.013 to < 0.001). Lack of information was the greatest barrier to ERAS knowledge (n = 97; 62.6%), while seminars/lectures from international and national leaders were the preferred learning method (n = 59; 41.3%). Most supported broad implementation of ERAS (n = 130; 87.8%).

Conclusion: There is a need to promote ERAS and provide education, which may be nuanced based on the results, to improve implementation in Australia. Nurses particularly need to be engaged in ERAS protocols given their significant presence throughout the surgical journey. There is also a need to co-design implementation strategies with stakeholders that target identified facilitators and barriers, including lack of support from senior administration, managers and clinicians and resource constraints.

Background: Open reduction and plate fixation is a standard procedure for treating traumatic symphyseal disruptions, but has a high incidence of implant failure. Several studies have attempted to identify predictors for implant failure and discussed its impact on functional outcome presenting conflicting results. Therefore, this study aimed to identify predictors of implant failure and to investigate the impact of implant failure on pain and functional outcome.

Methods: In a single-center, retrospective, observational non-controlled cohort study in a level-1 trauma center from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2017, 42 patients with a plate fixation of a traumatic symphyseal disruption aged ≥ 18 years with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. The following parameters were examined in terms of effect on occurrence of implant failure: age, body mass index (BMI), injury severity score (ISS), polytrauma, time to definitive treatment, postoperative weight-bearing, the occurrence of a surgical site infection, fracture severity, type of posterior injury, anterior and posterior fixation. A total of 25/42 patients consented to attend the follow- up examination, where pain was assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale and functional outcome using the Majeed Pelvic Score.

Results: Sixteen patients had an anterior implant failure (16/42; 37%). None of the parameters studied were predictive for implant failure. The median follow-up time was six years and 8/25 patients had implant failure. There was no difference in the Numerical Rating Scale, but the work-adjusted Majeed Pelvic Score showed a better outcome for patients with implant failure.

Conclusion: implant failure after symphyseal disruptions is not predictable, but appears to be clinically irrelevant. Therefore, an additional sacroiliac screw to prevent implant failure should be critically discussed and plate removal should be avoided in asymptomatic patients.

Traumatic pelvic ring injuries continue to represent a major challenge due to the high rates of post-injury mortality of around 30-40% in the peer-reviewed literature. The main root cause of potentially preventable mortality relates to the delayed recognition of the extent of retroperitoneal hemorrhage and post-injury coagulopathy. The understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of pelvic trauma is predicated by classification systems for grading of injury mechanism and risk stratification for developing post-injury coagulopathy with subsequent uncontrolled exsanguinating hemorrhage. This review article elaborates on the current understanding of the pathophysiology of severe pelvic trauma with a focus on the underlying mechanisms of retroperitoneal bleeding and associated adverse outcomes.

Background: Mortality of patients with a femoral neck fracture is high, especially within the first year after surgery, but also remains elevated thereafter. The aim of this study was to identify factors potentially associated with long-term mortality in patients homogeneously treated with hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was performed at a single level 1 national trauma center at the university hospital of Leipzig (Saxony, Germany). The study time-window was January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2020. Primary outcome measure was mortality depending on individual patient-related characteristics and perioperative risk factors. Inclusion criteria was a low-energy femoral neck fracture (Garden I-IV) in geriatric patients 60 years of age or older that were primarily treated with bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Date of death or actual residence of patients alive was obtained from the population register of the eastern German state of Saxony, Germany. The outcome was tested using the log-rank test and plotted using Kaplan-Meier curves. Unadjusted and adjusted for other risk factors such as sex and age, hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models and presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: The 458 included patients had a median age of 83 (IQR 77-89) years, 346 (75%) were female and 113 (25%) male patients. Mortality rates after 30 days, 1, 5 and 10 years were 13%, 25%, 60% and 80%, respectively. Multivariate regression analysis revealed age (HR = 1.1; p < 0.001), male gender (HR = 1.6; p < 0.001), ASA-Score 3-4 vs. 1-2 (HR = 1.3; p < 0.001), dementia (HR = 1.9; p < 0.001) and a history of malignancy (HR = 1.6; p = 0.002) as independent predictors for a higher long-term mortality risk. Perioperative factors such as preoperative waiting time, early surgical complications, or experience of the surgeon were not associated with a higher overall mortality.

Conclusions: In the present study based on data from the population registry from Saxony, Germany the 10-year mortality of older patients above 60 years of age managed with hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture was 80%. Independent risk factors for increased long-term mortality were higher patient age, male gender, severe comorbidity, a history of cancer and in particular dementia. Perioperative factors did not affect long-term mortality.

Background: Optimizing transitional care by practicing family-centered care might reduce unplanned events for patients who undergo major abdominal cancer surgery. However, it remains unknown whether involving family caregivers in patients' healthcare also has negative consequences for patient safety. This study assessed the safety of family involvement in patients' healthcare by examining the cause of unplanned events in patients who participated in a family involvement program (FIP) after major abdominal cancer surgery.

Methods: This is a secondary analysis focusing on the intervention group of a prospective cohort study conducted in the Netherlands. Data were collected from April 2019 to May 2022. Participants in the intervention group were patients who engaged in a FIP. Unplanned events were analyzed, and root causes were identified using the medical version of a prevention- and recovery-information system for monitoring and analysis (PRISMA) that analyses unintended events in healthcare. Unplanned events were compared between patients who received care from family caregivers and patients who received professional at-home care after discharge. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze data.

Results: Of the 152 FIP participants, 68 experienced an unplanned event and were included. 112 unplanned events occurred with 145 root causes since some unplanned events had several root causes. Most root causes of unplanned events were patient-related factors (n = 109, 75%), such as patient characteristics and disease-related factors. No root causes due to inadequate healthcare from the family caregiver were identified. Unplanned events did not differ statistically (interquartile range 1-2) (p = 0.35) between patients who received care from trained family caregivers and those who received professional at-home care after discharge.

Conclusion: Based on the insights from the root-cause analysis in this prospective multicenter study, it appears that unplanned emergency room visits and hospital readmissions are not related to the active involvement of family caregivers in surgical follow-up care. Moreover, surgical follow-up care by trained family caregivers during hospitalization was not associated with increased rates of unplanned adverse events. Hence, the concept of active family involvement by proficiently trained family caregivers in postoperative care appears safe and feasible for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Background: Limited data exists regarding the impact of anesthesia residents on operating room efficiency and patient safety outcomes. This investigation hypothesized that supervised anesthesiology residents do not increase anesthesia-controlled or prolonged extubation times compared to supervised certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNA)/certified anesthesiologist assistants (CAA) or anesthesiologists working independently. Secondary objectives included differences in critical outcomes such as intraoperative hypotension, cardiac and pulmonary complications, acute kidney injury, and mortality.

Methods: This retrospective single-center 24-month (January 1, 2020- December 31, 2021) cohort focused on primary outcomes of anesthesia-controlled times and prolonged extubation (>15 min) with additional assessment of secondary patient outcomes in adult patients having general anesthesia with an endotracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway for elective non-cardiac surgery. The study excluded sedation, obstetric, endoscopic, ophthalmology, and non-operating room procedures. Procedures were divided into three groups: anesthesiologists working solo, anesthesiologists supervising residents, or anesthesiologists supervising CRNA/CAAs. After univariate analysis, multivariable models were constructed to control for the univariate cofactor differences in the primary and secondary outcomes.

Results: A total of 15,084 surgical cases met the inclusion criteria for this study for the three different care models: solo anesthesiologists (1,204 cases), anesthesiologist/resident pairing (3,146 cases), and anesthesiologist/CRNA/CAA (14,040 cases). Before multivariate analysis, the resident group exhibited longer anesthesia-controlled times (median, [interquartile range], 26.1 [21.7-32.0], p < 0.001), compared to CRNA/CAA (23.9 [19.7-29.5]), and attending-only surgical cases (21.0 [17.9-25.4]). After adjusting for covariates in a general linear regression model (age, BMI, ASA classification, comorbidities, arterial line insertion, surgical service, and surgical location), there were no significant differences in the anesthesia-controlled times between the provider groups. Prolonged extubation times (>15 min) were significantly less common in the anesthesiologist-only group compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). Despite these time differences, there were no clinically significant differences among the groups in postoperative pulmonary or cardiac complications, renal impairment, or the 30-day mortality rate of patients.

Conclusion: Anesthesia residents do not increase anesthesia-controlled operating room times or adversely affect clinically relevant patient outcomes compared to anesthesiologists working independently or supervising certified registered nurse anesthetists or certified anesthesiologist assistants.

Machine learning algorithms have the potential to significantly improve patient safety in spine surgeries by providing healthcare professionals with valuable insights and predictive analytics. These algorithms can analyze preoperative data, such as patient demographics, medical history, and imaging studies, to identify potential risk factors and predict postoperative complications. By leveraging machine learning, surgeons can make more informed decisions, personalize treatment plans, and optimize surgical techniques to minimize risks and enhance patient outcomes. Moreover, by harnessing the power of machine learning, healthcare providers can make data-driven decisions, personalize treatment plans, and optimize surgical interventions, ultimately enhancing the quality of care in spine surgery. The findings highlight the potential of integrating artificial intelligence in healthcare settings to mitigate risks and enhance patient safety in surgical practices. The integration of machine learning holds immense potential for enhancing patient safety in spine surgeries. By leveraging advanced algorithms and predictive analytics, healthcare providers can optimize surgical decision-making, mitigate risks, and personalize treatment strategies to improve outcomes and ensure the highest standard of care for patients undergoing spine procedures. As technology continues to evolve, the future of spine surgery lies in harnessing the power of machine learning to transform patient safety and revolutionize surgical practices. The present review article was designed to discuss the available literature in the field of machine learning techniques to enhance patient safety in spine surgery.

Background: Patients with unplanned readmissions to the intensive care unit (ICU) are at high risk of preventable adverse events. The Rothman Index represents an objective real-time grading system of a patient's clinical condition and a predictive tool of clinical deterioration over time. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that the Rothman Index represents a sensitive predictor of unanticipated ICU readmissions.

Methods: A retrospective propensity-matched cohort study was performed at a tertiary referral academic medical center in the United States from January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2022. Inclusion criteria were adult patients admitted to an ICU and readmitted within seven days of transfer to a lower level of care. The control group consisted of patients who were downgraded from ICU without a subsequent readmission. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice for end-of-life care. Secondary outcome measures were overall hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, and 30-day readmission rates. Propensity matching was used to control for differences between the study cohorts. Regression analyses were performed to determine independent risk factors of an unplanned readmission to ICU.

Results: A total of 5,261 ICU patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 212 patients (4%) had an unanticipated readmission to the ICU within 7 days. The study cohort and control group were stratified by propensity matching into equal group sizes of n = 181. Lower Rothman Index scores (reflecting higher physiologic acuity) at the time of downgrade from the ICU were significantly associated with an unplanned readmission to the ICU (p < 0.0001). Patients readmitted to ICU had a lower mean Rothman Index score (p < 0.0001) and significantly increased rates of mortality (19.3% vs. 2.2%, p < 0.0001) and discharge to hospice (14.4% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.0073) compared to the control group of patients without ICU readmission. The overall length of ICU stay (mean 8.0 vs. 2.2 days, p < 0.0001) and total length of hospital stay (mean 15.8 vs. 7.3 days, p < 0.0001) were significantly increased in patients readmitted to ICU, compared to the control group.

Conclusion: The Rothman Index represents a sensitive predictor of unanticipated readmissions to ICU, associated with a significantly increased mortality and overall ICU and hospital length of stay. The Rothman Index should be considered as a real-time objective measure for prediction of a safe downgrade from ICU to a lower level of care.