Background A video and medical data recorder in the operating theatre is possible, but concerns over privacy, data use and litigation have limited widespread implementation. The literature on legal considerations and challenges to overcome, and guidelines related to use of data recording in the surgical environment, are presented in this narrative review. Methods A review of PubMed and Embase databases and Cochrane Library was undertaken. International jurisprudence on the topic was searched. Practice recommendations and legal perspectives were acquired based on experience with implementation and use of a video and medical data recorder in the operating theatre. Results After removing duplicates, 116 citations were retrieved and abstracts screened; 31 articles were assessed for eligibility and 20 papers were finally included. According to the European General Data Protection Regulation and US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, researchers are required to make sure that personal data collected from patients and healthcare professionals are used fairly and lawfully, for limited and specifically stated purposes, in an adequate and relevant manner, kept safe and secure, and stored for no longer than is absolutely necessary. Data collected for the sole purpose of healthcare quality improvement are not required to be added to the patient's medical record. Conclusion Transparency on the use and purpose of recorded data should be ensured to both staff and patients. The recorded video data do not need to be used as evidence in court if patient medical records are well maintained. Clear legislation on data responsibility is needed to use the medical recorder optimally for quality improvement initiatives.

Background Surgical safety may be improved using a medical data recorder (MDR) for the purpose of postoperative team debriefing. It provides the team in the operating room (OR) with the opportunity to look back upon their joint performance objectively to discuss and learn from suboptimal situations or possible adverse events. The aim of this study was to investigate the satisfaction of the OR team using an MDR, the OR Black Box®, in the OR as a tool providing output for structured team debriefing. Methods In this longitudinal survey study, 35 gastro-intestinal laparoscopic operations were recorded using the OR Black Box® and the output was subsequently debriefed with the operating team. Prior to study, a privacy impact assessment was conducted to ensure alignment with applicable legal and regulatory requirements. A structured debrief model and an OR Back Box® performance report was developed. A standardized survey was used to measure participant’s satisfaction with the team debriefing, the debrief model used and the performance report. Factor analysis was performed to assess the questionnaire’s quality and identified contributing satisfaction factors. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify variables associated with participants’ opinions. Results In total, 81 team members of various disciplines in the OR participated, comprising 35 laparoscopic procedures. Mean satisfaction with the OR Black Box® performance report and team debriefing was high for all 3 identified independent satisfaction factors. Of all participants, 98% recommend using the OR Black Box® and the outcome report in team debriefing. Conclusion The use of an MDR in the OR for the purpose of team debriefing is considered to be both beneficial and important. Team debriefing using the OR Black Box® outcome report is highly recommended by 98% of team members participating.

ObjectivePain in chronic pancreatitis is subdivided in a continuous or intermittent pattern, each thought to represent a different entity, requiring specific treatment. Because evidence is missing, we studied pain patterns in a prospective longitudinal nationwide study.Design1131 patients with chronic pancreatitis (fulfilling M-ANNHEIM criteria) were included between 2011 and 2018 in 30 Dutch hospitals. Patients with continuous or intermittent pain were compared for demographics, pain characteristics, quality of life (Short-Form 36), imaging findings, disease duration and treatment. Alternation of pain pattern and associated variables were longitudinally assessed using a multivariable multinomial logistic regression model.ResultsAt inclusion, 589 patients (52%) had continuous pain, 231 patients (20%) had intermittent pain and 311 patients (28%) had no pain. Patients with continuous pain had more severe pain, used more opioids and neuropathic pain medication, and had a lower quality of life. There were no differences between pain patterns for morphological findings on imaging, disease duration and treatment. During a median follow-up of 47 months, 552 of 905 patients (61%) alternated at least once between pain patterns. All alternations were associated with the Visual Analogue Scale pain intensity score and surgery was only associated with the change from pain to no pain.ConclusionContinuous and intermittent pain patterns in chronic pancreatitis do not seem to be the result of distinctly different pathophysiological entities. The subjectively reported character of pain is not related to imaging findings or disease duration. Pain patterns often change over time and are merely a feature of how severity of pain is experienced.