Browsing by Author "Manchev, V."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    An analysis of adverse events and human error associated with the imaging of patients at a major trauma centre in South Africa
    (Health & Medical Publishing Group, 2019) Bashir, A. A.; Kong, V. Y.; Buitendag, J. J. P.; Manchev, V.; Bekker, W.; Bruce, J. L.; Laing, G. L.; Brysiewicz, P.; Clarke, D. L.
    Background. There is growing realisation that human error contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality in modern healthcare. A number of taxonomies and classification systems have been developed in an attempt to categorise errors and quantify their impact. Objectives. To record and identify adverse events and errors as they impacted on acute trauma patients undergoing a computed tomography (CT) scan, and then quantify the effect this had on the individual patients. It is hoped that these data will provide evidence to develop error prevention programmes designed to reduce the incidence of human error. Methods. The trauma database was interrogated for the period December 2012 - April 2017. All patients aged >18 years who underwent a CT scan for blunt trauma were included. All recorded morbidity for these patients was reviewed. Results. During the period under review, a total of 1 566 patients required a CT scan at our institution following blunt trauma. Of these, 192 (12.3%, 134 male and 58 female) experienced an error related to the process of undergoing a CT scan. Of 755 patients who underwent a CT scan with intravenous contrast, detailed results were available for 312, and of these 46 (14.7%) had an acute deterioration in renal function. According to Chang’s taxonomy, physical harm occurred as follows: grade I n=6, grade II n=62, grade III n=45, grade IV n=11, grade V n=27, grade VI n=21, grade VII n=15, grade VIII n=3 and grade IX n=2. Adverse events were performing an unnecessary scan (n=24), omitting an indicated scan (n=23), performing the scan incorrectly (n=8), scanning the wrong body part (n=7), equipment failure (n=18), omitting treatment following the scan (n=6), incorrect interpretation of the scan (n=65), deterioration during the scan (n=6) and others (n=35). The setting for the error was the ward (n=19), the radiology suite (n=126), the emergency department (n=45) and the operating theatre (n=2). The staff responsible for the adverse events were medical (n=155), nursing (n=4) and radiology staff (n=15). There were 67 errors of commission and 125 errors of omission. The primary cause was a planning problem in 78 cases and an execution problem in 114. Conclusions. Errors and adverse events related to obtaining a CT scan following blunt polytrauma are not uncommon and may impact significantly on the patient. Communication is essential to eliminate errors related to performing the wrong type of scan. The commonest errors relate to misinterpretation of the scan.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The spectrum of animal related injuries managed at a major trauma centre in South Africa
    (Health and Medical Publishing Group, 2019) Wessels, E. U.; Kong, V. Y.; Buitendag, J.; Moffatt, S.; Ras, A. B.; Ras, M.; Smith, M. T. D.; Laing, G. L.; Bruce, J. L.; Bekker, W.; Manchev, V.; Clarke, D. L.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Humans come into contact and interact with an array of animals in a number of areas and environments. We set out to review our experience with animal-related injuries in Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa METHODS: All patients who sustained an injury secondary to an interaction with an animal in the period December 2012-December 2017 were identified from the Hybrid Electronic Medical Registry (HEMR RESULTS: There were 104 patients in the study sample. The mean age of patients in the study was 32.8 years, with a range from 1 to 76 years old. 75% (n = 78) were male and 25% (n = 26) female. Out of the 104 animal-related injuries, 67 were blunt trauma, 39 penetrating trauma and 3 a combination of blunt and penetrating trauma. The species causing trauma included dogs (53), horses (29), cows (18), buffalo (1), warthog (1), impala (1) and a single goat (1). The median time from injury to hospitalisation was 46.62 hours (range from 0 to 504 hours). Injuries occurred to the head (n = 32), face (n = 9), neck (n = 32), abdomen (n = 22), urogenital system (n = 6), upper limb (n = 39) and lower limb (n = 39). The Injury Severity Score (ISS) mean for the patients was 8.16, the range 1-4, the median 9 and the standard deviation 6.88. In 49 patients the treatment was non-operative. In the remaining 55 patients, a total of 68 operative procedures were required. Operations included wound debridement/surgical washout (n = 38), laparotomy (n = 9), arterial repair/ligation (n = 8), skin graft (n = 4), craniotomy (n = 5), fasciotomy (n = 2), amputation (n = 1), and placement of an ICP monitor (n = 1). 49 of these operations were for patients with dog bite injuries. The mean hospital stay was 0.13 days with a range of 0-4 days. Four patients were admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and two patients died CONCLUSION: Human interactions with animals may result in injuries which require surgical treatment. The most common animal injury is a dog bite but in the case of the larger domestic farm animals, blunt force type injuries and goring can result in significant injuries which require complex surgical interventions.