Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Urologic errors in surgical procedures].

Authors: V, Lent; H, Pichlmaier; F, Baumbusch; B, Weber; M, Laaser;

[Urologic errors in surgical procedures].

Abstract

In the examinations of the appraisal commission of Northern Rhine the third most frequent urologic errors are ascertained after surgical procedures. In order to prevent them, it is adequate to evaluate their causes.Urologic claims were examined that came before the appraisal commission for treatment errors of the Northern Rhine Physicians' Authority between 1975 and 2005. The results of the first 23 years were compared with those of the last 7 years. The judgment criteria were professional standards and required care.Ninety-five treatment errors were registered in 1975-2005. From 1975 to 1998 there were 60 such errors (2.6 per year) and from 1999 to 2005 there were 35 (5.0 per year). These errors concerned diagnosis in 14.7% of cases (mainly testicular torsion), indication in 7.5%, and explanations of the surgery in 2.1%. About half the cases (46.3%) applied to surgical technique, especially for injuries to the spermatic cord, urinary bladder, ureter, or urethra. In nearly one third of cases (29.4%), errors were found in postoperative care, concerning especially lesions of the spermatic cord and ureter.There is considerable risk of misjudging or even causing urologic disorders in abdominal and vascular surgery. This applies most strongly to diagnosis, above all for testicular torsion. Hernia surgery and colon resection are the treatments leading to the highest number of injuries to testicular vessels, ureter, bladder, and/or urethra. Such occurrences cannot be tolerated if they can be avoided or, if unavoidable, not recognized promptly and adequately managed.

Keywords

Adult, Male, Spermatic Cord, Urologic Diseases, Adolescent, Medical Errors, Urology, Urinary Bladder, Urethra, Germany, Surgical Procedures, Operative, Humans, Ureter, Spermatic Cord Torsion

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    1
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
1
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!