The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The incidence and nature of surgical adverse events in Colorado and Utah in 1992
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND Despite more than three decades of research on iatrogenesis, surgical adverse events have not been subjected to detailed study to identify their characteristics. This information could be invaluable, however, for guiding quality assurance and research efforts aimed at reducing the occurrence of surgical adverse events. Thus we conducted a retrospective chart review of 15,000 randomly selected admissions to Colorado and Utah hospitals during 1992 to identify and analyze these events. METHODS We selected a representative sample of hospitals from Utah and Colorado and then randomly sampled 15,000 nonpsychiatric discharges from 1992. With use of a 2-stage record-review process modeled on previous adverse event studies, we estimated the incidence, morbidity, and preventability of surgical adverse events that caused death, disability at the time of discharge, or prolonged hospital stay. We characterized their distribution by type of injury and by physician specialty and determined incidence rates by procedure. RESULTS Adverse events were no more likely in surgical care than in nonsurgical care. Nonetheless, 66% of all adverse events were surgical, and the annual incidence among hospitalized patients who underwent an operation or child delivery was 3.0% (confidence interval 2.7% to 3.4%). Among surgical adverse events 54% (confidence interval 48.9% to 58.9%) were preventable. We identified 12 common operations with significantly elevated adverse event incidence rates that ranged from 4.4% for hysterectomy (confidence interval 2.9% to 6.8%) to 18.9% for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (confidence interval 8.3% to 37.5%). Eight operations also carried a significantly higher risk of a preventable adverse event: lower extremity bypass graft (11.0%), abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (8.1%), colon resection (5.9%), coronary artery bypass graft/cardiac valve surgery (4.7%), transurethral resection of the prostate or of a bladder tumor (3.9%), cholecystectomy (3.0%), hysterectomy (2.8%), and appendectomy (1.5%). Among all surgical adverse events, 5.6% (confidence interval 3.7% to 8.3%) resulted in death, accounting for 12.2% (confidence interval 6.9% to 21.4%) of all hospital deaths in Utah and Colorado. Technique-related complications, wound infections, and postoperative bleeding produced nearly half of all surgical adverse events. CONCLUSION These findings provide direction for research to identify the causes of surgical adverse events and for targeted quality improvement efforts.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Incidence of Adverse Drug Events and Potential Adverse Drug Events: Implications for Prevention
Bates, D. W. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03530010043033 · Cited by 2,127
Bates, D. W. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1311 · Cited by 2,107
The Importance of Surgeon Experience for Clinical and Economic Outcomes From Thyroidectomy
Sosa, J. A., Bowman, H. M., Tielsch, J. M., Powe, N. R., Gordon, T. A., & Udelsman, R. (1998) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/00000658-199809000-00005 · Cited by 1,118 · cited 1×
“Technique-related complications 90 (71-114) Postoperative bleeding 47 (34-65) Other infection 28 (18-42) Wound infection 27 (17-42) Drug-related injury 27 (17-41) Deep venous thrombosis 14 (8-26) Postpartum/neonatal related 11 (6-22) Wound problem (noninfectious) 10 (5-21) Acute myocardial infarction 10 (5-21) Nonsurg…”
Background
Cited by
Dindo, D., Demartines, N., & Clavien, P.-A. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae · Cited by 31,378
The Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications: Five-Year Experience
Clavien, P. A., Barkun, J., de Oliveira, M. L., Vauthey, J. N., Dindo, D., Schulick, R. D., de Santibañes, E., Pekolj, J., Slankamenac, K., Bassi, C., et al. (2009) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3181b13ca2 · Cited by 11,482
A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population
Haynes, A. B., Weiser, T. G., Berry, W. R., Lipsitz, S. R., Breizat, A.-H. S., Dellinger, E. P., Herbosa, T., Joseph, S., Kibatala, P. L., Lapitan, M. C. M., et al. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0810119 · Cited by 5,688
Self-citationGlobal Surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development
Meara, J. G., Leather, A. J. M., Hagander, L., Alkire, B. C., Alonso, N., Ameh, E. A., Bickler, S. W., Conteh, L., Dare, A. J., Davies, J., et al. (2015) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60160-x · Cited by 3,851
Self-citationExplainable machine-learning predictions for the prevention of hypoxaemia during surgery
Lundberg, S. M., Nair, B., Vavilala, M. S., Horibe, M., Eisses, M. J., Adams, T., Liston, D. E., Low, D. K.-W., Newman, S.-F., Kim, J., et al. (2018) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-018-0304-0 · Cited by 1,967
Metadata
- Authors
- Gawande, A. A., Thomas, E. J., Zinner, M. J., & Brennan, T. A.
- Venue
- Surgery
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1999-07
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 66-75
- ISSN
- 0039-6060 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2072867503
- Cited by
- 977
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 23.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.