Department of General Surgery, Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Yeovil, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ann Surg. 2021 Apr 1;273(4):778-784. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003452.
To investigate the frequency, nature, and severity of intraoperative adverse near miss events within advanced laparoscopic surgery and report any associated clinical impact.
Despite implementation of surgical safety initiatives, the intraoperative period is poorly documented with evidence of underreporting. Near miss analyses are undertaken in high-risk industries but not in surgical practice.
Case video and data from 2 laparoscopic total mesorectal excision randomized controlled trials were analyzed (ALaCaRT ACTRN12609000663257, 2D3D ISRCTN59485808). Intraoperative adverse events were identified and categorized using the observational clinical human reliability analysis technique. The EAES classification was applied by 2 blinded assessors. EAES grade 1 events (nonconsequential error, no damage, or need for correction) were considered near misses. Associated clinical impact was assessed with early morbidity and histopathology outcomes.
One hundred seventy-five cases contained 1113 error events. Six hundred ninety-eight (62.7%) were near misses (median 3, IQR 2-5, range 0-15) with excellent inter-rater and test-retest reliability (κ=0.86, 95% CI 0.83-0.89, P < 0.001 and κ=0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.9, P < 0.001 respectively). Significantly more near misses were seen in patients who developed early complications (4 (3-6) vs. 3 (2-4), P < 0.001). Higher numbers of near misses were seen in patients with more numerous (P = 0.002) and more serious early complications (P = 0.003). Cases containing major intraoperative adverse events contained significantly more near misses (5 (3-7) vs. 3 (2-5), P < 0.001) with a major event observed for every 19.4 near misses.
Intraoperative adverse events and near misses can be reliably and objectively captured in advanced laparoscopic surgery. Near misses are commonplace and closely associated with morbidity outcomes.
调查高级腹腔镜手术中术中不良接近失误事件的频率、性质和严重程度,并报告任何相关的临床影响。
尽管实施了手术安全措施,但术中期间的记录很少,且证据表明报告不足。在高风险行业中进行了接近失误分析,但在外科实践中没有进行。
对 2 项腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术随机对照试验的病例视频和数据进行了分析(ALaCaRT ACTRN12609000663257,2D3D ISRCTN59485808)。使用观察性临床人为可靠性分析技术识别和分类术中不良事件。EAES 分类由 2 名盲法评估员进行应用。EAES 等级 1 事件(非后果性错误、无损害或无需纠正)被视为接近失误。使用早期发病率和组织病理学结果评估相关的临床影响。
175 例中有 1113 例出现误差事件。698 例(62.7%)为接近失误(中位数 3,IQR 2-5,范围 0-15),具有极好的组内和测试-重测可靠性(κ=0.86,95%CI 0.83-0.89,P<0.001 和 κ=0.88,95%CI 0.85-0.9,P<0.001)。在发生早期并发症的患者中,接近失误的发生率明显更高(4(3-6)比 3(2-4),P<0.001)。在早期并发症更多(P=0.002)和更严重的患者中,接近失误的数量更多(P=0.003)。包含主要术中不良事件的病例中,接近失误的发生率明显更高(5(3-7)比 3(2-5),P<0.001),每 19.4 次接近失误就会观察到一次主要事件。
在高级腹腔镜手术中可以可靠和客观地捕捉术中不良事件和接近失误。接近失误很常见,与发病率结果密切相关。