Cargando…

Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND: Surgical errors are acts or omissions resulting in negative consequences and/or increased operating time. This study describes surgeon-reported errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Intraoperative videos were uploaded and annotated on Touch Surgery(TM) Enterprise. Participants...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Humm, Gemma L, Peckham-Cooper, Adam, Chang, Jessica, Fernandes, Roland, Gomez, Naim Fakih, Mohan, Helen, Nally, Deirdre, Thaventhiran, Anthony J, Zakeri, Roxanna, Gupte, Anaya, Crosbie, James, Wood, Christopher, Dawas, Khaled, Stoyanov, Danail, Lovat, Laurence B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10564403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37611141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znad256
_version_ 1785118490717323264
author Humm, Gemma L
Peckham-Cooper, Adam
Chang, Jessica
Fernandes, Roland
Gomez, Naim Fakih
Mohan, Helen
Nally, Deirdre
Thaventhiran, Anthony J
Zakeri, Roxanna
Gupte, Anaya
Crosbie, James
Wood, Christopher
Dawas, Khaled
Stoyanov, Danail
Lovat, Laurence B
author_facet Humm, Gemma L
Peckham-Cooper, Adam
Chang, Jessica
Fernandes, Roland
Gomez, Naim Fakih
Mohan, Helen
Nally, Deirdre
Thaventhiran, Anthony J
Zakeri, Roxanna
Gupte, Anaya
Crosbie, James
Wood, Christopher
Dawas, Khaled
Stoyanov, Danail
Lovat, Laurence B
author_sort Humm, Gemma L
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Surgical errors are acts or omissions resulting in negative consequences and/or increased operating time. This study describes surgeon-reported errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Intraoperative videos were uploaded and annotated on Touch Surgery(TM) Enterprise. Participants evaluated videos for severity using a 10-point intraoperative cholecystitis grading score, and errors using Observational Clinical Human Reliability Assessment, which includes skill, consequence, and mechanism classifications. RESULTS: Nine videos were assessed by 8 participants (3 junior (specialist trainee (ST) 3–5), 2 senior trainees (ST6–8), and 3 consultants). Participants identified 550 errors. Positive relationships were seen between total operating time and error count (r(2) = 0.284, P < 0.001), intraoperative grade score and error count (r(2) = 0.578, P = 0.001), and intraoperative grade score and total operating time (r(2) = 0.157, P < 0.001). Error counts differed significantly across intraoperative phases (H(6) = 47.06, P < 0.001), most frequently at dissection of the hepatocystic triangle (total 282; median 33.5 (i.q.r. 23.5–47.8, range 15–63)), ligation/division of cystic structures (total 124; median 13.5 (i.q.r. 12–19.3, range 10–26)), and gallbladder dissection (total 117; median 14.5 (i.q.r. 10.3–18.8, range 6–26)). There were no significant differences in error counts between juniors, seniors, and consultants (H(2) = 0.03, P = 0.987). Errors were classified differently. For dissection of the hepatocystic triangle, thermal injuries (50 in total) were frequently classified as executional, consequential errors; trainees classified thermal injuries as step done with excessive force, speed, depth, distance, time or rotation (29 out of 50), whereas consultants classified them as incorrect orientation (6 out of 50). For ligation/division of cystic structures, inappropriate clipping (60 errors in total), procedural errors were reported by junior trainees (6 out of 60), but not consultants. For gallbladder dissection, inappropriate dissection (20 errors in total) was reported in incorrect planes by consultants and seniors (6 out of 20), but not by juniors. Poor economy of movement (11 errors in total) was reported more by consultants (8 out of 11) than trainees (3 out of 11). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that surgical experience influences error interpretation, but the benefits for surgical training are currently unclear.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10564403
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105644032023-10-11 Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy Humm, Gemma L Peckham-Cooper, Adam Chang, Jessica Fernandes, Roland Gomez, Naim Fakih Mohan, Helen Nally, Deirdre Thaventhiran, Anthony J Zakeri, Roxanna Gupte, Anaya Crosbie, James Wood, Christopher Dawas, Khaled Stoyanov, Danail Lovat, Laurence B Br J Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: Surgical errors are acts or omissions resulting in negative consequences and/or increased operating time. This study describes surgeon-reported errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Intraoperative videos were uploaded and annotated on Touch Surgery(TM) Enterprise. Participants evaluated videos for severity using a 10-point intraoperative cholecystitis grading score, and errors using Observational Clinical Human Reliability Assessment, which includes skill, consequence, and mechanism classifications. RESULTS: Nine videos were assessed by 8 participants (3 junior (specialist trainee (ST) 3–5), 2 senior trainees (ST6–8), and 3 consultants). Participants identified 550 errors. Positive relationships were seen between total operating time and error count (r(2) = 0.284, P < 0.001), intraoperative grade score and error count (r(2) = 0.578, P = 0.001), and intraoperative grade score and total operating time (r(2) = 0.157, P < 0.001). Error counts differed significantly across intraoperative phases (H(6) = 47.06, P < 0.001), most frequently at dissection of the hepatocystic triangle (total 282; median 33.5 (i.q.r. 23.5–47.8, range 15–63)), ligation/division of cystic structures (total 124; median 13.5 (i.q.r. 12–19.3, range 10–26)), and gallbladder dissection (total 117; median 14.5 (i.q.r. 10.3–18.8, range 6–26)). There were no significant differences in error counts between juniors, seniors, and consultants (H(2) = 0.03, P = 0.987). Errors were classified differently. For dissection of the hepatocystic triangle, thermal injuries (50 in total) were frequently classified as executional, consequential errors; trainees classified thermal injuries as step done with excessive force, speed, depth, distance, time or rotation (29 out of 50), whereas consultants classified them as incorrect orientation (6 out of 50). For ligation/division of cystic structures, inappropriate clipping (60 errors in total), procedural errors were reported by junior trainees (6 out of 60), but not consultants. For gallbladder dissection, inappropriate dissection (20 errors in total) was reported in incorrect planes by consultants and seniors (6 out of 20), but not by juniors. Poor economy of movement (11 errors in total) was reported more by consultants (8 out of 11) than trainees (3 out of 11). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that surgical experience influences error interpretation, but the benefits for surgical training are currently unclear. Oxford University Press 2023-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10564403/ /pubmed/37611141 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znad256 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Humm, Gemma L
Peckham-Cooper, Adam
Chang, Jessica
Fernandes, Roland
Gomez, Naim Fakih
Mohan, Helen
Nally, Deirdre
Thaventhiran, Anthony J
Zakeri, Roxanna
Gupte, Anaya
Crosbie, James
Wood, Christopher
Dawas, Khaled
Stoyanov, Danail
Lovat, Laurence B
Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_full Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_fullStr Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_full_unstemmed Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_short Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_sort surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10564403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37611141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znad256
work_keys_str_mv AT hummgemmal surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT peckhamcooperadam surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT changjessica surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT fernandesroland surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT gomeznaimfakih surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT mohanhelen surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT nallydeirdre surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT thaventhirananthonyj surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT zakeriroxanna surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT gupteanaya surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT crosbiejames surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT woodchristopher surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT dawaskhaled surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT stoyanovdanail surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT lovatlaurenceb surgicalexperienceandidentificationoferrorsinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy