OR Manager August 2023 - 31

Patient Safety
ual search and the other using the MSF
to find the needle. We randomized the
trials with different needle sizes and locations.
The users had a maximum of 5
minutes to decide. Sometimes, if someone
in the non-MSF group said there was
no needle, we gave them the MSF device
to continue searching. We recorded the
time to find the needle with the MSF separately.
We also tried a manual search
method in some laparotomy trials to see
if it affected accuracy or time.
C-arm vs C-arm and the MSF vs the MSF experiment
We did a total of 49 trials using the
laparotomy model, with a similar distribution
of needle size, needle location,
and presence between the two
groups. The MSF group had a significantly
higher success rate than the
manual search group, at 97% compared
to 46.7%, respectively. And like the haystack
scenarios, the MSF group showed
a significantly shorter time to determine
the presence of a needle at around 2
minutes compared to about 3.9 minutes
for the manual group (sidebar,
Manual search vs the MSF experiments).
When we looked at the data of both
in-vivo studies and took into account
things like surgical approach, needle
size, needle presence, needle location,
and whether we used the C-arm,
we found that using the MSF by itself
was linked to accurately determining
whether a needle was present. And
when combined with X-ray, the odds of
getting it right shot up by 12.1 times.
Q: Do these results show that the MSF
is a reliable tool to help OR managers
and nurses effectively manage miscounts?
The
nice thing about the MSF is it gives
you both sound and visual cues to help
you find where the RSS is hiding. This
study seemed to show that it effectively
determines both the presence as well
as the location of these sharp objects,
which is exactly what you want in a miscount
situation. The groups that used
the MSF had better accuracy in detecting
the presence of a needle, were
www.ormanager.com
KEY TAKEAWAY: In this scenario, compared with an advanced X-ray device and a technician on-hand, the MSF
alone determined the presence of a needle with comparable accuracy and speed.
Manual search vs the MSF experiment
KEY TAKEAWAY: The MSF alone was linked to accurate determinations that a needle was present, and the odds
of successful determination shot up when combined with X-ray.
more successful in finding lost needles,
and did it all in less time. More tests in
real-life situations will help us be sure,
but this study was a promising start.
When combined with current miscount
protocols, the MSF seems like a valuable
addition to OR tools.
In a miscount situation or if a metal
object coming out of a patient is broken,
I recommend immediately beginning
a search using the MSF. X-ray
could still be called, then canceled if
the RSS is found. But don't waste 20 to
30 minutes waiting around. ORM
-Ivy Montgomery is a GoTo-Market
executive who is
passionate about improving
patient outcomes with innovative
technologies, especially
in the areas of diagnosis, treatment,
and prevention of diseases.
Reference
Kang H S, Khoraki J, Gie J, et al. Multiphase
preclinical assessment of a
novel device to locate unintentionally
retained surgical sharps: a proofof-concept
study. Patient Safety in
Surgery. 2023;17(10).
OR Manager | August 2023 31

https://pssjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13037-023-00359-8 http://www.ormanager.com

OR Manager August 2023

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of OR Manager August 2023