The application of human reliability analysis to carpal tunnel decompression

• Published in: Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England Vol. 106; no. 5; pp. 432 - 438
• Main Authors: Lucey, Á, Kennedy, S, Hussey, A, McInerney, N, Kelly, JL, Joyce, KM
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BMJ Publishing Group LTD 01.05.2024; Royal College of Surgeons
• Subjects: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome - surgery; Clinical Competence; Decompression, Surgical - methods; Hand surgery; Human error; Humans; Iatrogenesis; Information communication; Literature reviews; Medical Errors - prevention & control; Reproducibility of Results; Surgeons; Surgery; Task analysis; Task Performance and Analysis; Trauma and Orthopaedics; Human error identification; Carpal tunnel decompression; Hierarchal task analysis; Human reliability analysis
• ISSN: 0035-8843; 1478-7083; 1478-7083
• DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2023.0038

Many surgical procedures are prone to human error, particularly in the learning phase of skills acquisition. Task standardisation has been suggested as an approach to reducing errors, but it fails to account for the human factors associated with learning. Human reliability analysis (HRA) is a structured approach to assess human error during surgery. This study used HRA methodologies to examine skills acquisition associated with carpal tunnel decompression. The individual steps or subtasks required to complete a carpal tunnel decompression were identified using hierarchical task analysis (HTA). The systematic human error reduction and prediction approach (SHERPA) was carried out by consensus of subject matter experts. This identified the potential human errors at each subgoal, the level of risk associated with each task and how these potential errors could be prevented. Carpal tunnel decompression was broken down into 46 subtasks, of which 21 (45%) were medium risk and 25 (55%) were low risk. Of the 46 subtasks, 4 (9%) were assigned high probability and 18 (39%) were assigned medium probability. High probability errors (>1/50 cases) included selecting incorrect tourniquet size, failure to infiltrate local anaesthetic in a proximal-to-distal direction and completion of the World Health Organization (WHO) surgical sign-out. Three (6%) of the subtasks were assigned high criticality, which included failure to aspirate before anaesthetic injection, whereas 21 (45%) were assigned medium criticality. Remedial strategies for each potential error were devised. The use of HRA techniques provides surgeons with a platform to identify critical steps that are prone to error. This approach may improve surgical training and enhance patient safety.