Audio and Video Recording System for Routine Documentation of Fluoroscopic Procedures

Jacobs, Benjamin; Duncan, James R.; Street, Mandie; Murray, Dave

doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2010.01.030

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most importantly, as the patient is not the object of the study itself, patient identifiers should be removed. This means that written informed consent does not necessarily have to be obtained from the patient. According to the general privacy rules, an opt‐out option is sufficient and should be provided to the patient in a timely manner, with their decision clearly noted in the medical record.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal perspectives on black box recording devices in the operating environment

Dalen

Legemaate

Schlack

et al. 2019

British Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal perspectives on black box recording devices in the operating environment

Dalen

Legemaate

Schlack

et al. 2019

British Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies have used video to audit practices in the OR 31. This system was generally used to analyse and improve the performance of surgical techniques and to prevent an adverse event in the OR 32 33. This type of recording system has also been used to improve practices outside the OR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes, risk of infection and behaviours in the operating room (the ARIBO Project): a prospective, cross-sectional study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionInappropriate staff behaviours can lead to environmental contamination in the operating room (OR) and subsequent surgical site infection (SSI). This study will focus on the continued assessment of OR staff behaviours using a motion tracking system and their impact on the SSI risk during surgical procedures.Methods and analysisThis multicentre prospective cross-sectional study will include 10 ORs of cardiac and orthopaedic surgery in 12 healthcare facilities (HCFs). The staff behaviour will be assessed by an objective, continued and prolonged quantification of movements within the OR. A motion tracking system including eight optical cameras (VICON-Bonita) will record the movements of reflective markers placed on the surgical caps/hoods of each person entering the room. Different configurations of markers positioning will be used to distinguish between the staff category. Doors opening will be observed by means of wireless inertial sensors fixed on the doors and synchronised with the motion tracking system. We will collect information on the OR staff, surgical procedures and surgical environment characteristics. The behavioural data obtained will be compared (1) to the ‘best behaviour rules’ in the OR, pre-established using a Delphi method and (2) to surrogates of the infectious risk represented by microbiological air counts, particle counts, and a bacteriological sample of the wound at closing. Statistics will be performed using univariate and multivariate analysis to adjust on the aerolic and architectural characteristics of the OR. A multilevel model will allow including surgical specialty and HCFs effects. Through this study, we will develop an original approach using high technology tools associated to data processing techniques to evaluate ‘automatically’ the behavioural dynamics of the OR staff and their impact on the SSI risk.Ethics and disseminationApprobation of the Institutional Review Board of Paris North Hospitals, Paris 7 University, AP-HP (no 11-113, 6 April 2012). The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, and national and international conference presentations.

show abstract

“…Peer review of videos can also enhance existing quality improvement efforts [16]. For example, procedure videos can better inform morbidity and mortality conferences and sentinel event root-cause analyses that have traditionally relied on the notes of clinicians, which can be limited and even biased.…”

Section: The Potential Benefits Of Drdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital recording and documentation of endoscopic procedures: physicians’ practice and perspectives

Peled-Raz

Willner

Shteinberg

et al. 2019

Isr J Health Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In recent years, it has become increasingly prevalent internationally to record and archive digital recordings of endoscopic procedures. This emerging documentation tool raises weighty educational, ethical and legal issues – which are viewed as both deterrents and incentives to its adoption. We conducted a survey study aimed at evaluating the use of DRD in endoscopic procedures, to examine physicians’ support of this practice and to map the considerations weighed by physicians when deciding whether or not to support a more extensive use of DRD. Methods Israeli physicians from specialties that employ endoscopic technics were surveyed anonymously for demographic background, existence and use of recording equipment, existence of institutional guidelines regarding DRD, and self-ranking (on a scale from 1 to 7) of personal attitudes regarding DRD. Results 322 physicians were surveyed. 84% reported performing routine endoscopic procedures, 78% had the required equipment for digital recording, and 64% of them stated that they never or only rarely actually recorded the procedure. General surgeons had the second highest rate of DRD equipment (96.5%) but the lowest rates of DRD practice (17.5%). The average ranking of support of DRD by all participants was 5.07 ± 1.9, indicating a moderately high level of support. Significant positive correlation exists between actual DRD rates and average support of DRD ( p < 0.001). Based on mediation models, for all specialties and with no exceptions, having routine recording guidelines and positive support of DRD were found to increase the probability of actual recording. Being a surgeon or an urologist negatively correlated with support of DRD, and decreased actual recording rates. The argument “Recording might cause more lawsuits” was ranked significantly higher than all other arguments against DRD ( p < 0.001), and “Recording could aid teaching of interns” was ranked higher than all other arguments in favor of DRD ( p < 0.001). Conclusions While DRD facilities and equipment are fairly widespread in Israel, the actual recording rate is generally low and varies among specialties. Having institutional guidelines requiring routine recording and a positive personal support of DRD correlated with actual DRD rates, with general surgeons being markedly less supportive of DRD and having the lowest actual recording rates. Physicians in all specialties were very much concerned about DRD’s potential to enhance lawsuits, and this greatly influenced their use of DRD. These findings should be addressed by educational efforts, centering on professionals from reluctant specialties, as well as by the issuing of both professional and institutional guidelines endorsing DRD as well as requiring it where applicable. Electronic supplementary material The online version of...

show abstract

Audio and Video Recording System for Routine Documentation of Fluoroscopic Procedures

Cited by 13 publications

References 13 publications

Legal perspectives on black box recording devices in the operating environment

Legal perspectives on black box recording devices in the operating environment

Attitudes, risk of infection and behaviours in the operating room (the ARIBO Project): a prospective, cross-sectional study

Digital recording and documentation of endoscopic procedures: physicians’ practice and perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About