Slashdot Mirror


Bar Codes Keep Surgical Objects Outside Patients

Reservoir Hill writes "Every year about 1,500 people in the US have surgical objects accidentally left inside them after surgery, according to medical studies. To prevent this potentially deadly problem, Loyola University Medical Center is utilizing a new technology that is helping its surgical teams keep track of all sponges used during a surgical procedure. Each sponge has a unique bar code affixed to it that is scanned by a high-tech device to obtain a count. Before a procedure begins, the identification number of the patient and the badge of the surgical team member maintaining the count are scanned into the counter. When a sponge is removed from a patient, it is scanned back into the system. A surgical procedure cannot end until all sponges are accounted for."

13 of 269 comments (clear)

  1. Surgeon accountability? by psued0ch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We all make mistakes, but surgeons today should have enough skill to ensure that objects are not left in the body in the first place. It seems like another scenario where use of advanced technology replaces basic skills that a human should have in these situations.

    1. Re:Surgeon accountability? by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the interesting points of the book was that there is very little scientific study on medical errors and how to best avoid them. Of course there isn't a lot of study, because the ever-more litigious state of modern medicine has created an atmosphere in which a physician/surgeon cannot say "I screwed up, let's learn from this" for fear of being sued into oblivion. While I certainly acknowledge that doctors should be accountable for true malpractice, we hold them to a standard of perfection that would be considered absolutely ridiculous in any other field. Here's a thought: how about no lawyer is allowed to file suit against a physician (on behalf of a patient) unless that lawyer has never screwed up a piece of paperwork. Alternatively, we could create a climate in which lawyers can be sued by their clients for the "pain and suffering" of losing a court case if the lawyer didn't pursue absolutely every available avenue, even the ones with a very poor likelihood of success.

      See how completely unreasonable that would be? I should be clear that I'm not bagging on lawyers here, but using them as an example of how another profession might be held to ridiculous standards of perfection. M&M conferences would be a far more effective learning tool if there was no sense of blame, and doctors could freely help their colleagues learn from prior mistakes.
      --
      P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
  2. Re:Ya gotta wonder.. by Rakishi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd prefer a doctor operating one me to pay attention to the patient not pause to remember if this was the 16th sponge he took out or if the 16th was the one he took out 10 minutes ago.

  3. Re:Ya gotta wonder.. by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There's 100's of objects involved in some surgeries, some procedures taking many hours with multiple specialists having to come in and out to work on their area of expertise.

    So until you have a medical degree and the years of on the job experience that it takes to even set foot in a surgery, you don't get to call anyone an idiot that does.

    Doing otherwise makes you look like a typical fat,lazy, IGNORANT armchair skeptic who can't even be bothered to use the slightest bit of brain power their pathetic brain is capable of mustering.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  4. Re:Anything. by Edward+Kmett · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have enough trouble getting these things to scan under ideal conditions at the grocery store let alone after being pulled used and bloodied from the body of a patient.

    --
    Sanity is a sandbox. I prefer the swings.
  5. Re:Ya gotta wonder.. by wizardforce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    they're too busy doing surgery to worry about counting the number of sponges. but really, think of the number of surgeries that are done every year vs how many actually have this sort of thing happen. surgeons could probably go through hundreds of surgeries without anything remaining in a patient that wasn't supposed to be there and there's always that one time... anything that reduces the probability of harm to those going through surgery is a good thing, it's not perfect but it's improving and that's always a good sign,

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  6. Re:RFID? by Bentov · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I work at a Level 1 trauma center and we do indeed use RFID sponges. Currently we are only using them on a trial basis for trauma surgeries, but I would guess that once the cost drops some, we will infact use them for all surgeries. The RFID wands cost about $50.($135 patient cost). Sponges are bad, but the body will encapsulate them after awhile....retractors on the other hand....I don't know how the hell you leave something 1 foot long and 1.5 inches wide in someone...that boggles the mind. As someone said earlier though, when you have multiple surgeons, multiple residents, multiple scrub techs and circulators, things will get missed. Ofcourse the worst thing is what people call it when something is left in a patient or something goes wrong, a "surgical misadventure" that is just wrong.

  7. Re:Anything. by chuckymonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think that an RFID would be great too. Have one on each surgical instrument and after everything is complete and you're ready so sew them back together you run a quick scan over the person's body to check for any RFID. That might be over generalized since I'm not a doctor, but I'm sure that everyone here gets the idea.

    --
    "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
  8. Re:Ya gotta wonder.. by YetAnotherLogin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you truly think that, then you should probably read this eye-opening article: The Checklist.

  9. Re:Anything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Meh. Previously, they were supposed to keep count of how many they inserted. If they forget to scan one on the way in, same problem. What they ought to do is open packs of 10 at a time. If they don't have 10 or 20 (clean and used) when they're done, then they know they have a problem. They could recycle the unused ones by sending them to some orderlies to repack them into 10s, and verify it by weight. $300 for a good electronic balance, and they have a system that will actually work. Sometimes low-tech is the appropriate solution.

  10. Re:High Tech Barcode Scanner? by deniable · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How do you scan a bar-code on a sponge designed to soak up blood and yuck? That might be the high-tech part of the scanner.

  11. A 39 cent solution by wealthychef · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have an idea, call me a radical. You take a slip of paper and two bowls. You count the sponges before the operation, and write the number on the paper and put the paper and the clean sponges in bowl 1. You put the used sponges in bowl 2. The operation cannot be completed until the number of sponges in the bowls matches that on the piece of paper. Come on, folks, why do you need a bar code scanner, how does that make this easier? The only advantage of the scanner is that it prevents doctors from lying and saying they counted them -- apparently it's a real possibility, or they would just count them.

    --
    Currently hooked on AMP
  12. Re:I'm cringing... by Valar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why, because he said that if you aren't a doctor you aren't qualified to discuss whether a particular addition to surgical procedure is meritorious? And that if you aren't a lawyer you should avoid giving out legal advice?

    That's not ego, it's simply the truth. In both cases, you are dealing with incredibly complex fields that contain a lot of specialist information. People spend 4 years _preparing_ to study these, and then another 4 years _studying_ them, and then years of internships, etc, before anyone will trust you to work on/for them unattended. I think because we have access to so much information right at our finger tips, we tend to forget that we aren't the specialists. I've learned enough about medicine to spot common diseases and to use the proper terminology to describe my symptoms. But you know what? If I'm sick and it doesn't go away after a week, I go to see a doctor I trust.

    On a side note, I see this a lot whenever economics or investment comes up on /. This happens to have become my specialty, through a long and winding road. I'll admit that it doesn't require quite as much specialist training, but modern money management is complex stuff. Yet all the time on /. I read people getting the basics wrong, and with great fervor (like a recent conversation regarding stock market yields and the inflation rate where a poster came to the conclusion that nobody but Warren Buffett makes money in the stock market). I get called an idiot when I correct them. It makes me laugh.