RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Wrong-site surgery is a never event and a serious, preventable patient safety incident. Within the United Kingdom, national guidance has been issued to minimize the risk of such events. The mandate includes preoperative marking of all surgical patients. This study aimed to quantify regional variation in practice within general surgery and opinions of the surgeons, to help guide the formulation and implementation of a regional general surgery preoperative marking protocol. METHODS: A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was designed and distributed to 120 surgeons within the Mersey region, United Kingdom. This included all surgical trainees in Mersey (47 registrars, 56 core trainees), 15 consultants, and 2 surgical care practitioners. This sought to ascertain their routine practice and how they would choose to mark for 12 index procedures in general surgery, if mandated to do so. RESULTS: A total of 72 responses (60%) were obtained to the SurveyMonkey questionnaire. Only 26 (36.1%) said that they routinely marked all of their patients preoperatively. The operating surgeon marked the patient in 69% of responses, with the remainder delegating this task. Markings were visible after draping in only 55.6% of marked cases. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, surgeons may not be adhering to "Good Surgical Practice"; practice is widely variable and surgeons are largely opposed and resistant to marking patients unless laterality is involved. We suggest that all surgeons need to be actively engaged in the design of local marking protocols to gain support, change practice, and reduce errors.
Asunto(s)
Errores Médicos , Cirujanos , Humanos , Pacientes , Cuidados Preoperatorios , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus disease (PD) is a chronic condition involved in natal cleft. Excision surgery carries equally morbid course of recovery to that of disease itself. Minimally invasive treatments therefore have been developed to minimise morbidity and improve healing rates. This review looks at the literature on effectiveness of endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT) and compares that of the other minimally invasive techniques in practice. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and CINAHL databases were searched to look at the peer-reviewed articles on minimally invasive treatments on PD. Primary endpoint was to determine complication rates. Data were pooled using random effect model. Heterogeneity among studies was estimated with χ2 tests. Statistical analysis was performed with Review Manager Version 5.1.2. RESULTS: Out of 371 papers, ten were retrieved for full appraisal. One randomised clinical trial (RCT) and four case series presented retrospective data on EPSiT. Five RCTs were on alternative minimally invasive treatments. Complication rate, return to work, wound healing rate and pain scores were superior in minimally invasive treatments compared to excision surgery. There was no statistically significant difference in complication rate or return to work in EPSiT compared to that of alternate minimally invasive techniques. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive treatments of pilonidal disease were found to be safe and effective compared to conventional techniques. It is also demonstrated that EPSiT is a safe alternative with a low short-term complication rate. Further randomised controlled trials are required to more accurately define its effectiveness and closely evaluate the side effect profile.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Seno Pilonidal/cirugía , Endoscopía , Humanos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/efectos adversos , Dolor Postoperatorio/etiología , Seno Pilonidal/patología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , RecurrenciaRESUMEN
A preoperative requirement is the correct and clear marking of a specific surgical site. We aimed to compare the ability of marker pens to withstand surgical preparation. Five volunteers with different Fitzpatrick skin types were marked with ten pens. Marked skin sites were prepared with chlorhexidine followed by chlorhexidine, betadine followed by chlorhexidine, and betadine followed by betadine. Each site was photographed in theatre. Two volunteers ranked the top three most visible marker pens from each photograph. The results showed that Sharpie® W10 black, Dual Tip (Purple Surgical), and Easimark modern regular tip (Leonhard Lang) were the best performers across all skin types. Red pen should be avoided with betadine skin preparation. The study concludes that the above named three markers are the best at withstanding surgical skin preparation. Different skin types require different colour ink for maximal clarity in marking. Biro and drywipe markers should never be used for surgical marking.