Surgical emergencies have serious repercussions for patients, personnel, and healthcare organizations. However, their etiology and development were poorly understood outside the scope of root-cause investigations. For a study, researchers sought to create a crisis management paradigm for surgery to help report and manage safety-critical occurrences.

A narrative review examined the literature on surgical crises to find failure reasons, processes, and impacts. Non-probability sampling was used to identify the sources, and the author panel decided on the inclusion and selection of each source. The data were subjected to a thematic analysis, and reporting was done in accordance with SALSA framework recommendations.

About 5 main themes were identified from data from 133 sources. According to analysis, surgical care systems weaken with time in a step-by-step fashion. Four areas of hazard or risk—the systems in which surgeons operate; surgeons’ technical, cognitive, and behavioral abilities; surgeons’ physiological and psychological state (operational condition); and surgeons’ professional culture—start this chain of crises. There were just 3 sorts of faults that might initiate a crisis: Failures to diagnose, plan, or carry out tasks are included in Type I performance errors; Type II. Awareness errors occur when people don’t understand, recognize, or extrapolate the effects of performance failures; Rescue errors of type III show a failure to fix a performance issue. When all 3 mistakes kinds occur simultaneously, harm results, and if no mitigating measures are taken, a crisis may result.

Surgical crises may be brought on by just 3 different forms of mistake and 4 different danger categories. Nevertheless, these could serve as general objectives for safety measures that open up new possibilities for crisis management.

Reference: sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1743919122004885