Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Error Avoidance in Dermatologic Surgery

  • Medical Surgery (M Alam, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Dermatology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Surgical errors pose a significant source of morbidity, mortality, and expense within the health care system. While rates of errors within dermatologic surgery are low, there are certain areas of dermatologic surgery that are more prone to errors than others. These include site identification, specimen labeling, triage, lidocaine toxicity, needle sticks, electrosurgery, and laser surgery. Within these areas, continued research is being done to identify the source of the errors and establish protocols to minimize the risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington (DC): Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pham J, Aswani M, Rosen M, Lee H, Huddle M, Weeks K, et al. Reducing medical errors and adverse events. Annu Rev Med. 2012;63:447–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Weingart S, Wildson R, Gibberd R, Harrison B. Epidemiology of medical error. BMJ. 2000;320:774–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Andel C, Davidow S, Hollander M, Moreno D. The economics of health care quality and medical errors. J Health Care Finance. 2012;39:39–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Coa L, Taylor J, Vidimos A. Patient safety in dermatology: a review of the literature. Dermatol Online J. 2010;16:3.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Coldiron B, Fisher A, Yelverton C, Balkrishnan R, Feldman M, Feldman S. Adverse event reporting: lessions learned for 4 years of Florida office data. Dermatol Surg. 2005;31:1079–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Starling J, Thosani M, Coldiron B. Determining the safety of office-based surgery: what 10 years of Florida data and 6 years of Alabama reveal. Dermatol Surg. 2012;38:171–7. This study showed that overall the risks of adverse events in dermatologic surgery is very low.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Reason J. Human error: models and management. BMJ. 2000;320:768–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gawande A. The checklist manifestro: how to get things right. 1st ed. New York: Metropolitan Books; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Perneger T. The Swiss cheese model of safety incidents: are there holes in the metaphor? BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:71.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim J, Dotson B, Thomas S, Nelson K. Standardized patient identification and specimen labeling: a retrospective analysis on improving patient safety. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68:53–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Collins S, Newhouse R, Porter J, Talsma A. Effectiveness of the surgical safety checklist in connectin errors: a literature review applying reason’s Swiss cheese model. AORN. 2014;100:65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ke M, Moul D, Camouse M, Avram M, Carranza D, Soriano T, et al. Where is it? The utility of biopsy-site photography. Dermatol Surg. 2009;36:198–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Levy S, Senter C, Hawkins R, Zhao J, Kao L, Lally K, et al. Implementing a surgical checklist: more than checking a box. Surgery. 2012;152:331–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yoon R, Alaia M, Hutzler L, Bosco J. Using “Near Misses” analysis to prevent wrong- site surgery. J Healthc Qual. 2013. doi:10.1111/jhq.12037.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Starling J, Coldiron B. Outcome of 6 years of protocol use for preventing wrong site office surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:807–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Alam M, Lee A, Ibrahimi O, Kim N, Bordeaux J, Chen K, et al. A multistep approach to improving biopsy site identification in dermatology. Physician, staff, and patient roles based on a Delphi consensus. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:550–8. This survey study of a stratified sample of experts in dermatologic surgery showed that photography is the gold standard for biopsy site identification.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nemeth S, Lawrence N. Site identification challenges in dermatologic surgery: a physician survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:262–8. This study showed that site identification is a common challenge for dermatologic surgeons and that photography is most helpful in surgical site identification.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rossy K, Lawrence N. Difficulty with surgical site identification: what role does it play in dermatology? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:257–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mcginness J, Goldstein M. The value of preoperative biopsy-site photography for identifying cutaneous lesions. Dermatol Surg. 2009;36:194–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lichtman M, Countryman N. Cell phone-assisted identification of surgery site. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:491–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Watson A, Redbord K, Taylor J, Shippy A, Kostecki J, Swerlick R. Medical error in dermatology practice: development of classification system to drive priority setting in patient safety efforts. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68:729–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Makary M, Epstein J, Pronovost P, Millman A, Hartman E, Freischlag J. Surgical specimen identification errors: a new measure of quality in surgical care. Surgery. 2007;141:450–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Layfield L, Anderson G. Specimen labeling errors in surgical pathology. An 18 month experience. Am J Clin Pathol. 2010;134:466–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lipworth A, Park J, Trefrey B, Rubin K, Geller A, Sober A, et al. Urgen access to speciality care melanoma clinic is associated with a higher rate of melanoma detection. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;64:1060–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Graves J, Fleischman M, Goldstein M. Derm access: a new triage system to rapidly identify suspicious skin lesions. Dermatol Surg. 2006;32:1486–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tsang M, Resneck J. Even patients with changing moles face long dermatology appointment wait-times: a study of simulated patient calls to dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006;55:54–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Resneck J, Lipton S, Pletcher M. Short wait times for patients seeking cosmetic botulinum toxin appointments with dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;57:985–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Warshaw E, Lederle F, Grill J, Gravely A, Bangerter A, Fortier L, et al. Accuracy of teledermatology for pigmented neoplasms. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;61:735–65.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Warshaw E, Lederle F, Grill J, Gravely A, Bangerter A, Fortier L, et al. Accuracy of teledermatology for nonpigmented neoplasms. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60:579–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Alam M, Ricci D, Havey J, Rademaker A, Witherspoon J, Dp W. Safety of peak serum lidocaine concentration after Mohs micrographic surgery: a prospective cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;63:87–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Habbema L. Efficacy of tumescent local anesthesia with variable lidocaine concentration in 3430 consecutive cases of liposuction. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;62:988–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Coleman P FT, Coleman Km. When one liter does not equal 1000 milliliters: implications for tumescent technique. Dermatol Surg. 2000:1024–28.

  34. Nordstrom H, Stange K. Plasma lidocaine levels and risks after liposuction wiht tumescent anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2005;49:1487–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang G, Weigang C. Tumescent liposuction: partitioning of lidocaine at a lower dose (252 mg/l). Dermatology. 2011;222:274–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ostad A, Kageyama N, Moy R. Tumescent anesthesia with a lidocaine dose of 55 mg/kg is safe for liposuction. Dermatol Surg. 1996;22:921–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Klein J, Kassarjdian N. Lidocaine toxicity with tumescent liposuction: a case reports of probable drug interactions. Dermatol Surg. 1997;23:1169–74.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Donnelly A, Chang Y, Nemeth-Ochoa S. Sharps injuries and reporting practices of U.S. dermatologists. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:1812–21. This cross sectional survey study found that 85.1% of dermatologists have had a sharps related injury with the highest rate amongst dermatologic surgeons.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Philips E, Conaway M, Jagger J. Percutaneous injuries before and after the needlestick safety and prevention act. Engl J Med. 2012;366:670–1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lopiccolo M, Balle M, Kouba D. Safety precautions in Mohs micrographic surgery for patients with known blood-borne infections: a survey-based study. Dermatol Surg. 2012;38:1059–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Prejean J, Song R, Hernandez A, Ziebell R, Green T, Walker F, et al. Estimated HIV incidence in the United States, 2006–2009. PLoS One. 2011;6:e17502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Koretz R, Abbey H, Coleman E, Gitnick G. Non-A, non-B post tranfusion hepatitis: looking back in the second decade. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:110–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kaspar T, Wagner R. Percutaneous injury during dermatologic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1991;24:756–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Barr J, Siegel D. Dangers of dermatologic surgery: protect your feet. Dermatol Surg. 2004;30:1495–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Taheri A, Mansoori P, Sandoval L, Feldman S, Pearce D, Williford P. Part II: technology, applications, and safety of electrosurgical devices. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014;76:e1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Howe N, Cherpelis B. Obtaining rapid and effective hemostasis. Part II: electrosurgery in patients with implantable cardiac devices. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:677. e1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sankaranarayanan G, Resapu, Jones D, Schwaitzberg, Suvrana D. Common uses and cited complicateds of energy in surgery. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:3056–72.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Alkatout I, Schollmeyer T, Hawaldar N, Sharma N, Mettler L. Principles and safety measure of electrosurgery in laproscopy. JSLS. 2012;16:130–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Healey J, Merchant R, Simpson C, Tang T, Beardsall M, Tung S, et al. Canadian cardiovascular society/Canadian anesthesiologists’ society/Canadian heart rhythm society joint position statement on the perioperative management of patient with implanted pacemakers, defibrillators, and neurostimulating devices. Can J Cardiol. 2012;28:141–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Yu S, Tope W, Grekin R. Cardiac devices and electromagnetic interference revisited: new radiofrequency technologies and implications for dermatologic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2005;31:932–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Culp W, Kimbrough B, Luna S, Maguddayao A. Operating room fire prevention: creating an electrosurgical unit fire safety device. Ann Surg. 2014;260:214–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Culp W, Kimbrough B, Luna S. Flammibility of surgical drapes and materials in varying concentrations of oxygen. Anesthesiology. 2013;119:770–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Mehta S, Bhananker S, Posner K, Domino K. Operating room fires: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2013;118:1133–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Arefiev K, Warycha M, Whiting D, Alam M. Flammibility of topical preparations and surgical dressings in cutaneous and laser surgery: a controlled simulation study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:700–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Scott E, Beswick A, Wakefield K. The hazards of diathermy plume. Part 1. The literature search. Br J Perioper Nur. 2004;14:409–14.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Oganesyan G, Eimpunth S, Kim S, Jiang S. Surgical smoke in dermatologic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2014;40:1373–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. American national standard for the safe use of lasers: ANSI Z136.1 (2007). Orlando, FL: American National Standards Institure 2007.

  58. Marshall J. Lasers in ophthalmology: the basic principles. Eye. 1988;2:S98–112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Youker S, Ammirati C. Practical aspects of laser safety. Facial Plast Surg. 2001;17:155–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Fader D, Ratner D. Principles of CO2/erbium laser safety. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26:235–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Alam M, Chaundry N, Goldberg L. Vitreous floaters following use of dermatologic lasers. Dermatol Surg. 2002;28:1088–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Dover J, Arndt K, Dinehart S, Fitzpatrick R, Gonzalez E. Guidelines of care for laser surgery. American Academy of Dermatology. Guidelines/Outcomes Committee. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:3 Pt 1.

  63. Wood R, Silney D, Basye R. Laser reflections from surgical instruments. Lasers Surg Med. 1992;12:675–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Pierce J, Lacey S, Lippert J, Lopez R, Franke J, Colvard M. An assessment of the occupational hazards related to medical lasers. J Occup Environ Med. 2011;53:1302–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Waldorf H, Kauvar N, Geronemus R, Leffell D. Remote fire with pulsed dye laser: risk and prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996;34:503–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

ᅟ

Conflict of Interest

Ashley Decker and Naomi Lawrence declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dermatology, Weill Cornell/New York Presbyterian, 9th Floor, 1305 York Ave, New York, NY, 10021, USA

    Ashley Decker

  2. Division of Dermatology, Cooper University Hospital Medical Center, 10000 Sagemore Dr, Suite 10103, Marlton, NJ, 08053, USA

    Naomi Lawrence

Authors
  1. Ashley Decker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naomi Lawrence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naomi Lawrence.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Medical Surgery

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Decker, A., Lawrence, N. Error Avoidance in Dermatologic Surgery. Curr Derm Rep 4, 113–118 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13671-015-0112-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13671-015-0112-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation