Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of errors in laparoscopic surgical procedures

  • Original article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The determination of laparoscopic surgeon ability is essential to training error avoidance. The present study describes a practical method of surgical error analysis. Methods: After review of practice videotapes of the excisional phase of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, consensus on the identification of eight errors was achieved. Interrater agreement at the end of this phase was 84–96%. Fourteen study videotapes of gallbladder excision were then observed independently by expert reviewers blinded to surgical team identity. Procedures were assessed using a scoring matrix of 1-min segments with each error reported each minute. Results: Interrater agreement was 84–100% for all error catagories. Conclusions: The present study demonstrates that excellent interrater agreement of procedural errors can be achieved by carefully defining and training recognition of targeted events. Extension of this simple and reliable analysis tool to other procedures should be feasible to define behaviors leading to adverse clinical outcomes.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A Darzi S Smith N Taffinder (1999) ArticleTitleAssessing operative skill needs to become more objective. Br Med J 318 887–888 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3jtVCluw%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. D Deziel KW Milikan SG Economou A Doolas ST Ko MC Airan (1993) ArticleTitleComplications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a national survey of 4,292 hospitals and an analysis of 77,604 cases. Am J Surg 165 9–14 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByyC3MfosVM%3D Occurrence Handle8418705

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. H Faulkner G Regehr J Martin R Reznick (1996) ArticleTitleValidation of an objective structured assessment of technical skills for surgical residents. Acad Med 71 1363–1365 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB2s%2FgtVY%3D Occurrence Handle9114900

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. AG Gallagher N McClure J McGuigan I Crothers J Browning (1999) ArticleTitleVirtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: a preliminary assessment of minimally invasive surgical trainer virtual reality (MIST VR). Endoscopy 31 310–313 Occurrence Handle10.1055/s-1999-15 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1Mzgt12msw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10376458

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. JA Jordan AG Gallagher J McGuigan K McGlade N McClure (2000) ArticleTitleA comparison between random randomly alternating imaging, normal laparoscopic imaging and virtual reality training in laparoscopic psychomotor skill acquisition. Am J Surg 180 208–211 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M%2FmtFOiug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11084131

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. AE Kazdin (1994) Behavior modification in applied settings. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company Pacific Grove, CA

    Google Scholar 

  7. AIM Macmillan A Cuschieri (1999) ArticleTitleAssessment of innate ability and skills for endoscopic manipulations by the advanced Dundee endoscopic psychomotor tester: predictive and concurrent validity. Am J Surg 177 274–277 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0002-9610(99)00016-1 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3jsFaktw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10219869

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. P Martin P Bateson (1986) measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  9. N Tafinder SG Smith J Huber RC Russell A Darzi (1999) ArticleTitleThe effect of a second-generation 3D endoscope on the laparoscopic precision of novices and experienced surgeons. SurgEndosc 13 1087–1092 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaL28XlslKitro%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. N. E. Seymour

    Present address: Department of Surgery, Baystate Medical Center, 759 Chestnut Street, Springfield, MA 01199, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, 330 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT 06520-8062, USA

    N. E. Seymour, S. A. Roman, M. K. O’Brien, D. K. Andersen & R. M. Satava

  2. Department of Psychology, David Keir Building, Queens University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, BT7 1NN, United Kingdom

    A. G. Gallagher

Authors
  1. N. E. Seymour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. G. Gallagher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. A. Roman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. K. O’Brien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. K. Andersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. R. M. Satava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. E. Seymour.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seymour, N., Gallagher, A., Roman, S. et al. Analysis of errors in laparoscopic surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 18, 592–595 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8927-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8927-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation