Identification of risk factors in minimally invasive surgery

a prospective multicenter study

Journal Article (2017)
Author(s)

Sara R C Driessen (Leiden University Medical Center)

Evelien M. Sandberg (Leiden University Medical Center)

Sharon P. Rodrigues (Leiden University Medical Center)

Erik van Zwet (Leiden University Medical Center)

Frank Willem Willem Jansen (Leiden University Medical Center, TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology
Copyright
© 2017 Sara R C Driessen, Evelien M. Sandberg, Sharon P. Rodrigues, Erik W. van Zwet, F.W. Jansen
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5248-4
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2017
Language
English
Copyright
© 2017 Sara R C Driessen, Evelien M. Sandberg, Sharon P. Rodrigues, Erik W. van Zwet, F.W. Jansen
Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology
Issue number
6
Volume number
31
Pages (from-to)
2467-2473
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Background: Since the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), concerns for patient safety are more often brought to the attention. Knowledge about and awareness of patient safety risk factors are crucial in order to improve and enhance the surgical team, the environment, and finally surgical performance. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify patient safety risk factors in laparoscopic hysterectomy and to determine their influence on surgical outcomes. Methods: A prospective multicenter study was conducted from April 2014 to January 2016, participating gynecologists registered their performed laparoscopic hysterectomies (LHs). If deemed necessary, gynecologists could fill out a checklist with validated patient safety risk factors. Association between procedures with and without an occurred risk factor(s) and the surgical outcomes (blood loss, operative time, and complications) were assessed, using multivariate logistic regression and generalized estimation equations. Results: Eighty-five gynecologists participated in the study, registering a total of 2237 LHs. For 627(28 %) procedures, the checklist was entered (in total 920 items). The most reported risk factors were related to the surgeon (19.6 %), the surgical team (14.4 %), technology (16.6 %), and the patient (26.8 %). The procedures where a risk factor was registered had significantly less favorable outcomes, higher complication rate (10.5 vs. 4.8 % (p = 0.002), longer operative time [114 vs. 95 min (p < 0.001)], and more blood loss [110 vs. 168 mL (p = 0.047)], which was mainly due to the technological and patient-related risk factors. Conclusion: Technological incidents are the most important and clinically relevant risk factors affecting surgical outcomes of LH. Future improvements of MIS need to focus on this. As awareness of safety risk factors in MIS is important, embedding of a safety risk factor checklist in registration systems will help surgeons to evaluate and improve their individual performance. This will inherently improve the surgical outcomes and thus patient safety.