Mahar Patrick, Wasiak Jason, Batty Lachlan, Fowler Steven, Cleland Heather, Gruen Russell L
School ofMedicine, Deakin University,Melbourne, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12(9):CD009404. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009404.pub2.
Specific clinical interventions are needed to reduce wrong-site surgery, which is a rare but potentially disastrous clinical error. Risk factors contributing to wrong-site surgery are variable and complex. The introduction of organisational and professional clinical strategies may have a role in minimising wrong-site surgery.
To evaluate the effectiveness of organisational and professional interventions for reducing wrong-site surgery (including wrong-site, wrong-side, wrong-procedure and wrong-patient surgery), including non-surgical invasive procedures such as regional blocks, dermatological, obstetric and dental procedures and emergency surgical procedures not undertaken within the operating theatre.
We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (June 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1948-June 2011), EMBASE (1947-June 2011), CINAHL (1980-June 2011), Dissertations and Theses (1861-June 2011), African Index Medicus, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences database, Virtual Health Library, Pan American Health Organization Database and the World Health Organization Library Information System. A grey literature search was conducted. Database searches were conducted June 2011.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies (CBAs) with at least two intervention and control sites, and interrupted-time-series (ITS) studies where the intervention time was clearly defined and there were at least three data points before and three after the intervention. Studies evaluated the effectiveness of organisational and professional interventions for reducing wrong-site surgery, including wrong site, wrong side and wrong procedure. Participants included all healthcare professionals providing care to surgical patients; studies where patients were involved to avoid the incorrect procedures or studies with interventions addressed to healthcare managers, administrators, stakeholders or health insurers.
Two review authors independently assessed the quality and abstracted data of all eligible studies using a standardised data extraction form, modified from the Cochrane EPOC checklists. We contacted study authors for additional information.
We included one study in this review. One ITS study evaluated a targeted educational intervention aiming at reducing the incidence of wrong-site tooth extractions. The intervention included examination of previous cases of wrong-site tooth extractions, educational intervention including a presentation of cases of erroneous extractions, explanation of relevant clinical guidelines and feedback by an instructor. Data was re-analysed using the Prais-Winsten time series and the change in level for annual number of mishaps was statistically significant at -4.52 (95% confidence interval (CI) -6.83 to -2.217) (standard error (SE) 0.5380). The change in slope was statistically significant at -1.16 (95% CI -2.22 to -0.10) (SE 0.2472; P < 0.05).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review identified one ITS study for a non-medical procedure conducted in a dental outpatient setting. The study suggested that the use of a specific educational intervention, in the above-mentioned context, which targets junior dental staff using a training session that included cases of wrong-site surgery, presentation of clinical guidelines and feedback by the instructor, was associated with a reduction in the incidence of wrong-site tooth extractions. Given the nature of the intervention in a very specific population, application of these results to a broader population undergoing other forms of surgery or invasive procedures should be undertaken cautiously.
需要采取特定的临床干预措施来减少手术部位错误,这是一种罕见但可能造成灾难性后果的临床失误。导致手术部位错误的风险因素多种多样且复杂。引入组织和专业临床策略可能有助于将手术部位错误降至最低。
评估组织和专业干预措施对减少手术部位错误(包括手术部位错误、手术侧别错误、手术程序错误和患者错误)的有效性,包括非手术侵入性操作,如区域阻滞、皮肤科、产科和牙科手术以及不在手术室进行的急诊手术。
我们检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane有效实践与护理组织(EPOC)小组专业注册库(2011年6月)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(Cochrane图书馆2011年第6期)、MEDLINE(1948年 - 2011年6月)、EMBASE(1947年 - 2011年6月)、CINAHL(1980年 - 2011年6月)、学位论文数据库(1861年 - 2011年6月)、非洲医学索引、拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学数据库、虚拟健康图书馆、泛美卫生组织数据库以及世界卫生组织图书馆信息系统。进行了灰色文献检索。数据库检索于2011年6月进行。
我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCT)、非随机对照试验、至少有两个干预组和对照组的前后对照研究(CBA)以及干预时间明确且干预前后至少有三个数据点的中断时间序列(ITS)研究。研究评估了组织和专业干预措施对减少手术部位错误的有效性,包括手术部位错误、手术侧别错误和手术程序错误。参与者包括所有为手术患者提供护理的医疗保健专业人员;涉及患者以避免错误程序的研究或针对医疗保健管理人员、行政人员、利益相关者或健康保险公司的干预措施的研究。
两位综述作者使用从Cochrane EPOC清单修改而来的标准化数据提取表,独立评估了所有符合条件的研究的质量并提取数据。我们联系研究作者获取更多信息。
本综述纳入了一项研究。一项ITS研究评估了旨在降低手术部位错误拔牙发生率的针对性教育干预措施。该干预措施包括检查以往手术部位错误拔牙病例、教育干预(包括展示错误拔牙病例、解释相关临床指南以及由指导教师提供反馈)。使用Prais - Winsten时间序列对数据进行重新分析,每年失误次数的水平变化在统计学上具有显著意义,为 - 4.52(95%置信区间(CI)- 6.83至 - 2.217)(标准误(SE)0.5380)。斜率变化在统计学上具有显著意义,为 - 1.16(95% CI - 2.22至 - 0.10)(SE 0.2472;P < 0.05)。
本综述的结果确定了一项在牙科门诊环境中针对非医疗程序的ITS研究。该研究表明,在上述背景下,使用针对初级牙科工作人员的特定教育干预措施,通过包含手术部位错误病例、临床指南展示以及指导教师反馈的培训课程,与手术部位错误拔牙发生率的降低相关。鉴于该干预措施针对的是非常特定的人群,应谨慎地将这些结果应用于接受其他形式手术或侵入性操作的更广泛人群。