Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jul 25:10.1097/PTS.0000000000001386.
doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000001386. Online ahead of print.

Using SEIPS 101 Tools to Model Surgical Count Processes

Affiliations

Using SEIPS 101 Tools to Model Surgical Count Processes

Julia Meilan et al. J Patient Saf. .

Abstract

Objectives: Retained foreign objects (RFOs) are a frequent sentinel event that may cause significant harm to patients. The surgical count is the primary prevention measure for RFOs, yet there has been limited research into the system factors that interact in this process. The objective of this study is to create SEIPS 101 tools that help to better understand the contributing systems factors.

Methods: Trained researchers directly observed the count process in 22 general and gynecological surgical cases and collected data including the people; tasks; tools; environmental; and organizational factors. Ad hoc in situ interviews were conducted as the tools were being iteratively constructed during observations.

Results: The journey map found 6 different phases of the counting process, conducted in 4 different environments, consisting of multiple tasks performed by 3 OR team members. The people map identified 8 people influencing the counting process, many requiring bidirectional communication. The tasks and tools matrix found 4 high-frequency use tools across key tasks, with medium to low ease of access and/or usability. The PETT scan revealed 56 individual barriers and 31 individual facilitators.

Conclusions: Our results reveal the variety of systems factors and their complex interactions during the count process, challenge current thinking in RFO avoidance, and reveal new ways to intervene. They demonstrate the hidden contribution that resilience plays in prevention and how not only adhering to count policies and best practice guidelines can prevent RFOs, which by necessity challenges the value of deviations, adaptations, and descriptions of error as a reasonable explanation to why RFOs occur.

Keywords: RFO prevention; Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 101; retained foreign objects (RFOs); surgical count process; the surgical count.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors disclose no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Cima RR, Kollengode A, Garnatz J, et al. Incidence and characteristics of potential and actual retained foreign object events in surgical patients. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2008;207(1):80–87. - PubMed
    1. The Joint Commission Quick Safety 20: Stategies to pevent URFOs (Updated May 2022). 2022. https://www.jointcommission.org/resources/news-and-multimedia/newsletter...
    1. National Quality Forum Serious reportable events in healthcare—2011 update: a consensus report, 2011. NQF Washington, DC: 2011. ISBN 978-0-9828421-8-8.
    1. Yildirim T, Parlakgumus A, Yildirim S. Diagnosis and management of retained foreign objects. J coll physicians surg Pak 2015;25(5):367–71. - PubMed
    1. Gawande AA, Studdert DM, Orav EJ, et al. Risk factors for retained instruments and sponges after surgery. New England Journal of Medicine 2003;348(3):229–35. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources