Using a data-matrix-coded sponge counting system across a surgical practice: Impact after 18 months

Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

Volumn 37, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 51-58

  Cima, Robert R ^a   Kollengode, Anantha ^b   Clark, James ^a   Pool, Sarah ^a   Weisbrod, Cheryl ^a   Amstutz, Gwendolyn J ^a   Deschamps, Claude ^a  

^a Mayo Clinic College of Medicine   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FOREIGN BODY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL ERROR; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PILOT STUDY; SURGERY; SURGICAL SPONGE; TIME;

AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FOREIGN BODIES; HUMANS; MEDICAL ERRORS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PILOT PROJECTS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE; SURGICAL SPONGES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 79952526430     PISSN: 15537250     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s1553-7250(11)37007-9     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Institute of Medicine: To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999.
2. National Quality Forum (NQF): Serious Reportable Events in Healthcare: A Consensus Report. Washington, DC: NQF, 2002.
3. Shetty R.: Towel Found in Dead Woman's Body. Aug. 6, 2004. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/06/health/main634558.shtml (last acces sed Dec. 7, 2010).
4. Sowka M.P.: Executive summary: The medical malpractice closed claims study. Conn Med 45:109-115, Feb. 1981.
5. Gawande A.A., et al.: Risk factors for retained instruments and sponges after surgery. N Engl J Med 348:229-235, Jan. 16, 2003. (Pubitemid 36077919)
6. Cima R.R., et al.: Incidence and characteristics of potential and actual retained foreign object events in surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg 207:80-87, Jul. 2008. Epub May 23, 2008.
7. Cima R.R., et al.: A multidisciplinary team approach to retained foreign objects. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 35:123-132, Mar. 2009.
8. Rogers A., Jones E., Oleynikov D.: Radio frequency identification (RFID) applied to surgical sponges. Surg Endosc 21:1235-1237, Jul. 2007. Epub May 5, 2007. (Pubitemid 47024770)
9. Macario A., Morris D., Morris S.: Initial clinical evaluation of a handheld device for detecting retained surgical gauze sponges using radiofrequency identification technology. Arch Surg 141:659-662, Jul. 2006. (Pubitemid 44079827)
10. Greenberg C.C., et al.: Bar-coding surgical sponges to improve safety: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 247:612-616, Apr. 2008. (Pubitemid 351440611)
11. Association of periOperative Registered Nurses (AORN): Recommended practices for sponge, sharp, and instrument counts. In Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver: AORN, Inc. 2008, pp. 293-302.
12. González-Ojeda A., et al.: Retained foreign bodies following intraabdominal surgery. Hepatogastroenterology 46:808-812, Mar.-Apr. 1999. (Pubitemid 29224744)
13. Hyslop J.W., Maull K.I.: Natural history of the retained surgical sponge. South Med J 75:657-660, Jun. 1982.
14. Yildirim S., et al.: Retained surgical sponge (gossypiboma) after intraabdominal or retroperitoneal surgery: 14 cases treated at a single center. Langenbecks Arch Surg 391:390-395, Aug. 2006. Epub Sep. 17, 2005. (Pubitemid 44298432)
15. Lauwers P.R., Van Hee R.H.: Intraperitoneal gossypibomas: The need to count sponges. World J Surg 24:521-527, May 2000. (Pubitemid 30210839)
16. Yeung K.W., Chang M.S., Huang J.F.: Imaging of transmural migration of a retained surgical sponge: A case report. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 20:567-571, Nov. 2004.
17. Christian C.K., et al.: A prospective study of patient safety in the operating room. Surgery 139:159-173, Feb. 2006. (Pubitemid 43170315)
18. Anderson S., Wittwer W.: Using bar-code point-of-care technology for patient safety. J Healthc Qual 26:5-11, Nov.-Dec. 2004.
19. Cochran G.L., et al.: Errors prevented by and associated with bar-code medication administration systems. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 33:293-301, May 2007.
20. Regenbogen S.E., et al.: Prevention of retained surgical sponges: A decision-analytic model predicting relative cost-effectiveness. Surgery 145: 527-535, May 2009. Epub Mar. 21, 2009.
21. Kaiser C.W., et al.: The retained surgical sponge. Ann Surg 224:79-84, Jul. 1996.
22. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS): Fact Sheet: CMS Improves Patient Safety for Medicare and Medicaid by Addressing Never Events. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=3224 (last accessed Dec. 7, 2010).
23. Dossett L.A., et al.: Cost-effectiveness of routine radiographs after emergent open cavity operations. Surgery 144:317-321, Aug. 2008. Epub Jun. 5, 2008.
24. Lincourt A.E., et al.: Retained foreign bodies after surgery. J Surg Res 138:170-174, Apr. 2007. Epub Feb. 1, 2007. (Pubitemid 46365726)