Retained Central Venous Catheter Guidewires: Interviews With Clinicians Who Have Made the Error.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Maryanne Z A Mariyaselvam, Alfie A C Wright, Peter J Young, Ken R Catchpole, Jane Greatorex, Arun K Gupta
{"title":"Retained Central Venous Catheter Guidewires: Interviews With Clinicians Who Have Made the Error.","authors":"Maryanne Z A Mariyaselvam, Alfie A C Wright, Peter J Young, Ken R Catchpole, Jane Greatorex, Arun K Gupta","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Central venous catheter whole guidewire retention is a serious, preventable patient safety incident that should not occur. Complications include guidewire migration, potentially resulting in cardiac perforation and tamponade. Despite national policy designed to prevent guidewire retention, this error still occurs. Guidewire retention is likely an omission error, however, the precise mechanism of error is unclear: we attempt to clarify why this error occurs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews were held with 10 clinicians who had made this error. Participants were questioned regarding the day of the error, the retention event, and new safety mechanisms introduced to mitigate future errors. Interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to identify possible contributory factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Retention errors occurred with experienced and junior clinicians, complex and routine patients, and in calm or stressful environments. Interruptions and distractions were perceived as commonplace, particularly at the \"critical moment\" when the catheter is inserted over the guidewire and the guidewire should be removed. Numerous safety checks were used by clinical teams; however, these mostly failed to ensure recognition of retention (4/48 successful recognitions).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Whole guidewire retention occurs in 1:3167 procedures. While training and current policies prevent most whole guidewire retentions, they do not stop the error from occurring and rely on removing human error consistently across thousands of procedures to prevent a single event. A safety-engineered mechanism of error prevention is required that applies to any clinical environment, is impervious to distraction or interruption, and does not rely on clinician memory to ensure guidewire removal.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001399","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Central venous catheter whole guidewire retention is a serious, preventable patient safety incident that should not occur. Complications include guidewire migration, potentially resulting in cardiac perforation and tamponade. Despite national policy designed to prevent guidewire retention, this error still occurs. Guidewire retention is likely an omission error, however, the precise mechanism of error is unclear: we attempt to clarify why this error occurs.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were held with 10 clinicians who had made this error. Participants were questioned regarding the day of the error, the retention event, and new safety mechanisms introduced to mitigate future errors. Interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to identify possible contributory factors.

Results: Retention errors occurred with experienced and junior clinicians, complex and routine patients, and in calm or stressful environments. Interruptions and distractions were perceived as commonplace, particularly at the "critical moment" when the catheter is inserted over the guidewire and the guidewire should be removed. Numerous safety checks were used by clinical teams; however, these mostly failed to ensure recognition of retention (4/48 successful recognitions).

Conclusions: Whole guidewire retention occurs in 1:3167 procedures. While training and current policies prevent most whole guidewire retentions, they do not stop the error from occurring and rely on removing human error consistently across thousands of procedures to prevent a single event. A safety-engineered mechanism of error prevention is required that applies to any clinical environment, is impervious to distraction or interruption, and does not rely on clinician memory to ensure guidewire removal.

留置中心静脉导管导丝:对犯错误的临床医生的访谈。
目的:中心静脉导管全导丝滞留是一种严重的、可预防的、不应发生的患者安全事件。并发症包括导丝移位,可能导致心脏穿孔和心包填塞。尽管国家政策旨在防止导丝滞留,但这种错误仍然发生。导丝保留可能是一种遗漏错误,然而,错误的确切机制尚不清楚:我们试图澄清为什么会发生这种错误。方法:对10名曾犯此错误的临床医生进行半结构化访谈。参与者被问及错误发生的日期、保留事件以及为减少未来错误而引入的新安全机制。访谈记录分析使用归纳专题分析,以确定可能的促成因素。结果:留置错误发生在经验丰富的临床医生和初级临床医生,复杂的和常规的患者,在平静或紧张的环境中。中断和分心被认为是司空见惯的,特别是在导管插入导丝和导丝应被移除的“关键时刻”。临床团队进行了大量的安全检查;然而,这些方法大多无法确保留存率的认可(4/48的成功认可)。结论:1:31 167手术中出现全导丝固位。虽然培训和现行政策可以防止大多数导丝保留,但它们并不能阻止错误的发生,而是依赖于在数千个程序中持续消除人为错误来防止单个事件。需要一种适用于任何临床环境的安全预防错误机制,不受干扰或中断的影响,并且不依赖于临床医生的记忆来确保导丝的移除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Patient Safety
Journal of Patient Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.60%
发文量
302
期刊介绍: Journal of Patient Safety (ISSN 1549-8417; online ISSN 1549-8425) is dedicated to presenting research advances and field applications in every area of patient safety. While Journal of Patient Safety has a research emphasis, it also publishes articles describing near-miss opportunities, system modifications that are barriers to error, and the impact of regulatory changes on healthcare delivery. This mix of research and real-world findings makes Journal of Patient Safety a valuable resource across the breadth of health professions and from bench to bedside.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信