Cirugía del lado erróneo: implicación del paciente y los profesionales. Experiencia en la Cirugía Mayor Ambulatoria de la Unidad del Pie
Abstract
Surgery of the wrong side is a very uncommon complication in orthopaedic surgery, but with serious consequences for the patient, the surgeon and the health institution, having to put all the necessary measures in place to prevent this occurring. We have conducted a prospective study on the introduction of a protocol to prevent surgery of the wrong side in 101 patients operated on for any foot disease in the Major Surgery Ambulatory Unit, performing three independent controls to verify the side: by the patient, by the nurse and by the anaesthetist. We review the information available of the side in the medical records and their correlation with the side operated on. Almost a quarter of the patients, 24.8%, were not informed that they had to make a mark on the foot to be operated on. No mark was made by 18.4% of the patients informed to do so, with no relationship between age, gender, education level, to live alone or previous foot operations. There was a lack of noting the side in the documentation, with this omission being more frequent in the Orthopaedic and Traumatology and Anaesthesiology medical records. Nine cases of inconsistency in the surgical side were detected, all in patients who had previous surgery in any foot. Marking of the side has been incorporated as routine practice in foot surgery, being beneficial for the safety of the patient, and should become normal practice in all surgical areas in the near future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Laterality errors have the potential to cause patient disability or even death, such as removing a patient's only functioning kidney, performing a wrong-side amputation, or removal of the healthy, cancer-free testicle.
“Laterality errors have the potential to cause patient disability or even death, such as removing a patient’s only functioning kidney [11], performing a wrong-side amputation [12], or removal of the healthy, cancer-free testicle [13].”
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Weng, K.-H., Chou, Y.-C., Kuo, Y.-T., Hsieh, T.-J., & Liu, C.-F. (2025) · JMIR formative research · doi:10.2196/76384
- Authors
- Asunción Márquez, J., López Gutiérrez, A., Pérez Martínez, V., Poggio Cano, D., & Combalia, A.
- Venue
- Revista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 104-114
- ISSN
- 1888-4415 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2002971150
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- es
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Revista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical site infection prevention
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Foot and Ankle Surgery
- Keywords
- wrong-site surgery, foot surgery, surgical site marking, patient safety, clinical documentation, patient information, outpatient surgery, orthopedic surgery
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Ambulatory Surgical Procedures, Female, Foot, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Medical Errors, Orthopedic Procedures
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review