Abstract
Purpose
Many hospitals experience one or more retained surgical item events per year, with risk of patient morbidity and medicolegal consequences. We hypothesized that the confidence and performance of the radiologist would be enhanced by prior training in retained surgical item detection and by prior exposure to commonly employed surgical instruments and devices.
Methods
A training module for radiology residents was created through literature review, expert consultation, and imaging of commonly employed surgical instruments and devices. A survey assessing resident command of background knowledge, policy, and image-based retained surgical item questions was created. Additionally resident confidence for hospital policy and retained surgical item identification was assessed. A pre-module survey and confidence questionnaire were administered to first- through fourth- year residents. For one month, the training module was available online for independent review. Subsequently, a post-module survey and confidence questionnaire were completed by participants. \(T\) tests were performed to evaluate pre- and posttest means for survey performance and confidence questions.
Results
Mean post-module survey performance significantly improved compared with pre-module performance. Mean confidence levels for ability to incidentally identify a retained surgical item on a radiograph obtained for another indication and current understanding of the institution’s policy regarding retained surgical items were also significantly increased.
Conclusion
The knowledge base, diagnostic performance, and confidence of radiology residents were significantly enhanced by online teaching module training in retained surgical item detection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cima RR et al (2008) Incidence and characteristics of potential and actual retained foreign object events in surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg 207(1):80–87. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.12.047
Gawande AA et al (2003) Risk factors for retained instruments and sponges after surgery. N Engl J Med 348(3):229. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa021721
Stawicki PS, Seamon MJ et al (2008) Retained surgical foreign bodies: a synopsis. Scientist 2(2):1–6
Whang G et al (2009) Left behind: unintentionally retained surgically placed foreign bodies and how to reduce their incidence-pictorial review. Am J Roentgenol 193(6 Suppl):S79–89. doi:10.2214/AJR.09.7153
Manzella A et al (2009) Imaging of gossypibomas: pictorial review. Am J Roentgenol 193(6 Suppl):S94–101. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.7132
Klein J et al (1988) The forgotten surgical foreign body. Gastrointest Radiol 13:173–176
Enker WE et al (2008) An incremental step in patient safety: reducing the risks of retained foreign bodies by the use of an integrated laparotomy pad/retractor. Surg Innov 15(3):203–207. doi:10.1177/1553350608321105
Conner R et al (eds) (2014) Recommended practices for prevention of retained surgical items. In: Perioperative standards and recommended practices, vol 1, pp 333–350
Kizer, KW, Stegun MB (2005) Serious reportable adverse events in health care. In: Henriksen K et al (eds) Advances in patient safety: from research to implementation (volume 4: programs, tools, and products). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Advances in Patient Safety (Rockville (MD). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20598/
Lembitz A, Clarke TJ (2009) Clarifying ‘Never Events and Introducing’ always events. Patient Saf Surg 3:26. doi:10.1186/1754-9493-3-26
Porter K et al (2013) Surgical foreign body identification on imaging studies: a training module for radiology residents. Educational Exhibit presented at the Radiological Society of North America meeting in Chicago, IL, 2013
Egorova NN et al (2008) Managing the prevention of retained surgical instruments: What is the value of counting? Ann Surg 247(1):13–18. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3180f633be
Stawicki SP, Evans DC et al (2009) Retained surgical foreign bodies: a comprehensive review of risks and preventive strategies. Scand J Surg Off Organ Finnish Surg Soc Scand Surg Soc 98(1):8–17
Greenberg CC et al (2008) The frequency and significance of discrepancies in the surgical count. Ann Surg 248(2):337–341. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318181c9a3
Wan W et al (2009) Improving safety in the operating room: a systematic literature review of retained surgical sponges. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 22(2):207–214. doi:10.1097/ACO.0b013e328324f82d
Moffatt-Bruce SD et al (2014) Risk factors for retained surgical items: a meta-analysis and proposed risk stratification system. J Surg Res 190(2):429–436. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2014.05.044
Cima et al (2008) Incidence and characteristics of potential and actual retained foreign object events in surgical patients
Acknowledgments
The Johns Hopkins radiology residents for participating in the online training module and assessment measures. Mr. Tony Petruccy for his assistance in taking photographs and radiographs of the surgical items included in the training module.
Conflict of interest
K. Porter, P. Bailey, R. Woods, W. Scott, and P. Johnson declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Porter, K.K., Bailey, P.D., Woods, R. et al. Retained surgical item identification on imaging studies: a training module for radiology residents. Int J CARS 10, 1803–1809 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1154-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1154-9