Cargando…

Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers

BACKGROUND: Marking the surgical site is a well-established part of pre-operative protocol and errors in marking have been implicated in wrong site surgery incidents and are a significant patient safety issue. There are many commercially available marker pens and anecdotally very little consistency...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sim, F. C. J., Angadi, D., Jarvis, G. E., Porteous, M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797114/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26997976
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-016-0097-6
_version_ 1782421889685127168
author Sim, F. C. J.
Angadi, D.
Jarvis, G. E.
Porteous, M.
author_facet Sim, F. C. J.
Angadi, D.
Jarvis, G. E.
Porteous, M.
author_sort Sim, F. C. J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Marking the surgical site is a well-established part of pre-operative protocol and errors in marking have been implicated in wrong site surgery incidents and are a significant patient safety issue. There are many commercially available marker pens and anecdotally very little consistency in which pen is used or the clarity of marking. Previous studies have shown subjective differences between different pens and the current paper sought to support this evidence with objective data and widen the investigation of commercially available pens. METHODS: Eight marker pens were used to mark two separate sites on three caucasian volunteers. These marks were photographed and assessed by six observers before and after the application of chlorhexidine skin preparation. The observers were blinded to which pen was used for each mark, and rated the clarity of the marks subjectively. The photographs were assessed using image analysis software to give an objective measure of clarity against the skin. RESULTS: There was a wide variation between the clarity of marks made by the different pens, and also a wide variation in the resistance to skin preparation. The Pentel N50 pen was the outstanding best performing pen across all categories. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that the Pentel N50 black marker pen be used for surgical site marking to improve patient safety and avoid adverse events.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4797114
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47971142016-03-18 Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers Sim, F. C. J. Angadi, D. Jarvis, G. E. Porteous, M. Patient Saf Surg Research BACKGROUND: Marking the surgical site is a well-established part of pre-operative protocol and errors in marking have been implicated in wrong site surgery incidents and are a significant patient safety issue. There are many commercially available marker pens and anecdotally very little consistency in which pen is used or the clarity of marking. Previous studies have shown subjective differences between different pens and the current paper sought to support this evidence with objective data and widen the investigation of commercially available pens. METHODS: Eight marker pens were used to mark two separate sites on three caucasian volunteers. These marks were photographed and assessed by six observers before and after the application of chlorhexidine skin preparation. The observers were blinded to which pen was used for each mark, and rated the clarity of the marks subjectively. The photographs were assessed using image analysis software to give an objective measure of clarity against the skin. RESULTS: There was a wide variation between the clarity of marks made by the different pens, and also a wide variation in the resistance to skin preparation. The Pentel N50 pen was the outstanding best performing pen across all categories. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that the Pentel N50 black marker pen be used for surgical site marking to improve patient safety and avoid adverse events. BioMed Central 2016-03-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4797114/ /pubmed/26997976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-016-0097-6 Text en © Sim et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Sim, F. C. J.
Angadi, D.
Jarvis, G. E.
Porteous, M.
Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
title Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
title_full Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
title_fullStr Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
title_full_unstemmed Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
title_short Assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
title_sort assessing clarity and erasability of commercially available pens for surgical site marking: a comparative study in human volunteers
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797114/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26997976
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-016-0097-6
work_keys_str_mv AT simfcj assessingclarityanderasabilityofcommerciallyavailablepensforsurgicalsitemarkingacomparativestudyinhumanvolunteers
AT angadid assessingclarityanderasabilityofcommerciallyavailablepensforsurgicalsitemarkingacomparativestudyinhumanvolunteers
AT jarvisge assessingclarityanderasabilityofcommerciallyavailablepensforsurgicalsitemarkingacomparativestudyinhumanvolunteers
AT porteousm assessingclarityanderasabilityofcommerciallyavailablepensforsurgicalsitemarkingacomparativestudyinhumanvolunteers