Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From box ticking to the black box: the evolution of operating room safety

  • Topic Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Efforts to improve the safety of patients in the operating room have focused on mitigating harm through the standardization of system, team, and human level factors. This article highlights existing and future methods for enhancing safety in the perioperative setting, and the theory and principles that underpin them.

Methods

Evidence surrounding the development and implementation of select surgical safety interventions is discussed.

Results

Work in human factors and engineering that has inspired safety interventions such as the WHO Safety Checklist, and more recently operating room recorders, represents a movement away from traditional, retrospective or reactive methods of studying surgical safety, to prospective and proactive ones.

Conclusions

Future work will examine the effectiveness of these interventions for improving patient outcomes and minimizing iatrogenic harm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bilimoria KY, Kmiecik TE, DaRosa DA et al (2009) Development of an online morbidity, mortality, and near-miss reporting system to identify patterns of adverse events in surgical patients. Arch Surg 144(4):305–311. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2009.5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hempel S, Maggard-Gibbons M, Nguyen DK et al (2015) Wrong-site surgery, retained surgical items, and surgical fires: a systematic review of surgical never events. JAMA Surg 150(8):796–805. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2015.0301

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Seiden SC, Barach P (2006) Wrong-side/wrong-site, wrong-procedure, and wrong-patient adverse events: are they preventable? Arch Surg 141(9):931–939. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.141.9.931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baker GR, Norton PG, Flintoft V et al (2004) The Canadian adverse events study: the incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada. Can Med Assoc J 170(11):1678–1686. https://doi.org/10.1053/cmaj.1040498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM et al (1991) Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard medical practice study I. N Engl J Med. 324(6):370–376. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199102073240604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Canadian Patient Safety Institute. Surgical safety in Canada: a 10-year review of CMPA and HIROC medico-legal data. www.patientsafetyinstitute.ca/en/toolsResources/Surgical-Safety-in-Canada/Pages/default.aspx

  7. America COQOHCI, Institute of Medicine (2000) To err is human. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  8. World Health Organization (2009) Surgical safety checklist. World Health Organization

  9. de Vries EN, Prins HA, Crolla RMPH et al (2010) Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med 363(20):1928–1937. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa0911535

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. World Health Organization (Genève) (2009) World alliance for patient safety. WHO Guidelines for Safe Surgery 2009

  11. Urbach DR, Govindarajan A, Saskin R, Wilton AS, Baxter NN (2014) Introduction of surgical safety checklists in Ontario, Canada. N Engl J Med 370(11):1029–1038. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1308261

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Haynes AB, Edmondson L, Lipsitz SR et al (2017) Mortality trends after a voluntary checklist-based surgical safety collaborative. Ann Surg 266(6):923–929. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Russ S, Rout S, Caris J et al (2015) Measuring variation in use of the WHO surgical safety checklist in the operating room: a multicenter prospective cross-sectional study. J Am Coll Surg 220(1):1–11.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.09.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gagliardi AR, Straus SE, Shojania KG, Urbach DR (2014) Multiple interacting factors influence adherence, and outcomes associated with surgical safety checklists: a qualitative study. Courvoisier DS, ed. PLoS One 9(9):e108585. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108585

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Bergs J, Lambrechts F, Simons P et al (2015) Barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of surgical safety checklists: a systematic review of the qualitative evidence. BMJ Qual Saf 24(12):776–786. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Patterson M, Deutsch ES (2015) Safety-I, safety-II and resilience engineering. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 45(12):382–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cppeds.2015.10.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jager E, McKenna C, Bartlett L, Gunnarsson R, Ho Y-H (2016) Postoperative adverse events inconsistently improved by the world health organization surgical safety checklist: a systematic literature review of 25 studies. World J Surg 40(8):1842–1858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3519-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Patel J, Ahmed K, Guru KA et al (2014) An overview of the use and implementation of checklists in surgical specialities—a systematic review. Int J Surg. 12(12):1317–1323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.10.031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Challacombe B, Dasgupta P, Amoroso P, Kirby R (2011) Wrong-side/site surgery. Trends Urol Men Health 2(5):32–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/tre.222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hanchanale V, Rao A, Motiwala H, Karim OMA (2014) Wrong site surgery! How can we stop it? Urol Ann 6(1):57–62. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.127031

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Alleemudder A, King P, Mehta S (2014) Point of technique: reducing wrong-side errors for endourology procedures. Urology 84(6):1541–1543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.06.077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shamim Khan M, Ahmed K, Gavazzi A et al (2013) Development and implementation of centralized simulation training: evaluation of feasibility, acceptability and construct validity. BJU Int 111(3):518–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11204.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yoon RS, Alaia MJ, Hutzler LH, Bosco JA (2015) Using “near misses” analysis to prevent wrong-site surgery. J Healthcare Qual 37(2):126–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/jhq.12037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Noble DJ, Pronovost PJ (2010) Underreporting of patient safety incidents reduces health care’s ability to quantify and accurately measure harm reduction. J Patient Saf 6(4):247–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Alsubaie H, Goldenberg MG, Grantcharov T (2019) Quantifying recall bias in surgical safety: a need for a modern approach to morbidity and mortality reviews. Can J Surg 62(1):39–43. https://doi.org/10.1503/cjs.017317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Langerman A, Grantcharov TP (2017) Are we ready for our close-up? Why and how we must embrace video in the OR. Ann Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gambadauro P, Magos A (2010) Digital video recordings for training, assessment, and revalidation of surgical skills. Surg Technol Int. 20:36–39

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Soucisse ML, Boulva K, Sideris L, Drolet P, Morin M, Dubé P (2016) Video coaching as an efficient teaching method for surgical residents—a randomized controlled trial. J Surg Educ 74(2):365–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.09.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wauben LSGL, van Grevenstein WMU, Goossens RHM, van der Meulen FH, Lange JF (2011) Operative notes do not reflect reality in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 98(10):1431–1436. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7576

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hung AJ, Chen J, Shah A, Gill IS (2018) Telementoring and telesurgery for minimally invasive procedures. J Urol 199(2):355–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Greenberg CC, Ghousseini HN, Pavuluri Quamme SR et al (2017) A statewide surgical coaching program provides opportunity for continuous professional development. Ann Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002341(Publish Ahead of Print:1)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ghani KR, Miller DC, Linsell S et al (2016) Measuring to improve: peer and crowd-sourced assessments of technical skill with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 69(4):547–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Goldenberg MG, Jung J, Grantcharov TP (2017) Using data to enhance performance and improve quality and safety in surgery. JAMA Surg. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.2888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kapoor A, Siemens DR (2014) “I told you so”: examining the impact of the surgical safety checklist. Can Urol Assoc J. 8(3–4):E221–E222. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2079

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Palagonia E, Mazzone E, De Naeyer G et al (2019) The safety of urologic robotic-surgery depends on the skills of the surgeon. World J Urol (in press)

  36. Han K, Bohnen JD, Peponis T et al (2017) The surgeon as the second victim? Results of the boston intraoperative adverse events surgeons’ attitude (BISA) study. J Am Coll Surg 224(6):1048–1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.12.039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, 399 Bathurst St, Toronto, ON, M5T 2S8, Canada

    Mitchell G. Goldenberg & Dean Elterman

Authors
  1. Mitchell G. Goldenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dean Elterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dean Elterman.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goldenberg, M.G., Elterman, D. From box ticking to the black box: the evolution of operating room safety. World J Urol 38, 1369–1372 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02886-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02886-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation