Adverse Events in the Operating Room: Definitions, Prevalence, and Characteristics. A Systematic Review

• Published in: World journal of surgery Vol. 43; no. 10; pp. 2379 - 2392
• Main Authors: Jung, James J., Elfassy, Jonah, Jüni, Peter, Grantcharov, Teodor
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 15.10.2019; John Wiley & Sons, Inc
• Subjects: Abdominal Surgery; Cardiac Surgery; Cross-Sectional Studies; General Surgery; Health care; Humans; Intraoperative Complications - epidemiology; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Morbidity; Operating Rooms; Postoperative period; Prevalence; Scientific Review; Surgery; Thoracic Surgery; Vascular Surgery
• ISSN: 0364-2313; 1432-2323; 1432-2323
• DOI: 10.1007/s00268-019-05048-1

Background Adverse events occur commonly in the operating room (OR) and often contribute to morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare spending. Validated frameworks to measure and report postoperative outcomes have long existed to facilitate exchanges of structured information pertaining to postoperative complication rates in order to improve patient safety. However, systematic evidence regarding measurement and reporting of intraoperative adverse events (iAE) is still lacking. Methods We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles published up to June 2016 that measured and reported iAE. We presented the terms and definitions used to describe iAE. We identified the types of reported iAE and summarized them into discrete categories. We reported frequencies of iAE by detection methods. Results Of the 47 included studies, 30 were cross-sectional, 14 were case-series, and 3 were cohort studies. The studies used 16 different terms and 22 unique definitions to describe 74 types of iAE. Frequencies of iAE appeared to vary depending on the detection methods, with higher numbers reported when direct observation in the OR was used to detect iAE. Twenty studies assessed severity of iAE, which were mostly based on whether they resulted in postoperative outcomes. Conclusions This study systematically reviewed the current evidence on prevalence and characteristics of iAE that were detected by direct observation, reviews of patient charts, administrative data and incident reports, and surveys and interviews of healthcare providers. Our findings suggest that direct observation method has the most potential to identify and characterize iAE in detail.