Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy01:26

Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy

Sigmoidoscopy and laparoscopy are distinct medical procedures that enable physicians to internally inspect different parts of the GI tract. Although they serve different purposes, each is essential for diagnosing and, in some cases, treating various medical conditions.
Sigmoidoscopy
Sigmoidoscopy is a diagnostic procedure that uses a flexible sigmoidoscope equipped with a light source and camera to examine the rectum and sigmoid colon. The procedure involves inserting the tube through the anus...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Comparison of outcomes of minimally invasive vs. open surgery in patients with symptomatic hiatal hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same author

Current validation practice undermines surgical AI development.

ArXiv·2026
Same author

Obesity care education in Canadian medical schools: A multi-site qualitative study.

Obesity pillars·2026
Same author

Beyond the scalpel: redefining surgical training for tomorrow: Canadian Conference for the Advancement of Surgical Education, Oct. 16-17, 2025 Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie·2026
Same author

Leveraging Large Language Models to Evaluate the Quality of Narrative Feedback for Surgery Residents in Competency-Based Medical Education.

Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches·2025
Same author

Examining the Quality and Quantity of Verbal Feedback in the Operating Room: A Multi-Specialty Study in a Canadian Context.

Journal of surgical education·2025
Same journal

Efficacy and safety of transoral incisionless fundoplication in non-obese and obese adults: a population-based cohort study from the United States.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same journal

Minimally invasive versus open surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same journal

Enhanced view/extended totally extraperitoneal plasty (eTEP) Rives-Stoppa repair versus open Rives-Stoppa repair: a single-center retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same journal

Robotic-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection: a scoping review of preclinical and early clinical evidence.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same journal

Conversion of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty to bariatric surgery.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same journal

Artificial intelligence and chatbots in general surgery: a survey among surgeons in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 13, 2026

Laparoscopic Anatomical Resection of the Right Anterior Lobe Based on the Laennec Capsule Technique
06:11

Laparoscopic Anatomical Resection of the Right Anterior Lobe Based on the Laennec Capsule Technique

Published on: May 2, 2025

Defining technical errors in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review.

Esther M Bonrath1, Nicolas J Dedy, Boris Zevin

  • 1Division of General Surgery, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada. bonrathe@smh.ca

Surgical Endoscopy
|February 26, 2013
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Technical errors in laparoscopic surgery impact patient safety. Current assessment methods vary widely, hindering comparisons and continuous learning. Better tools are needed for accurate error analysis and quality control.

More Related Videos

Laparoscopic Anatomical Right Hemihepatectomy via the In Situ Anterior Approach
05:30

Laparoscopic Anatomical Right Hemihepatectomy via the In Situ Anterior Approach

Published on: August 8, 2025

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 13, 2026

Laparoscopic Anatomical Resection of the Right Anterior Lobe Based on the Laennec Capsule Technique
06:11

Laparoscopic Anatomical Resection of the Right Anterior Lobe Based on the Laennec Capsule Technique

Published on: May 2, 2025

Laparoscopic Anatomical Right Hemihepatectomy via the In Situ Anterior Approach
05:30

Laparoscopic Anatomical Right Hemihepatectomy via the In Situ Anterior Approach

Published on: August 8, 2025

Area of Science:

  • Surgical proficiency and patient safety
  • Laparoscopic surgery techniques
  • Medical error analysis

Background:

  • Technical errors are a key aspect of surgical proficiency, significantly affecting patient safety and outcomes.
  • Few studies have comprehensively described and evaluated technical errors in surgery.
  • This review specifically examines technical errors documented in laparoscopic surgery.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review and assess the technical errors described in the existing literature on laparoscopic surgery.
  • To understand the current state of research on technical errors in this surgical field.
  • To identify limitations in the assessment and reporting of these errors.

Main Methods:

  • A comprehensive literature search was conducted across major databases (Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, OVID) from 1946 to 2012.
  • Search terms included "technical/medical error," "technical skill," and "adverse event" combined with "laparoscopy/laparoscopic surgery."
  • Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed articles in English that described technical errors, excluding opinion papers and non-laparoscopic surgery articles.

Main Results:

  • The initial search yielded 2,282 articles, narrowed down to 21 relevant studies based on inclusion criteria.
  • The included studies comprised observational studies (67%), randomized trials (14%), prospective interventional studies (10%), and retrospective analyses (10%).
  • Error analysis was used to determine error rates in routine procedures in 38% of studies, while 62% used error assessment to describe surgical skill in educational settings.

Conclusions:

  • Multiple approaches exist for assessing surgical technical errors, but definitions vary significantly, preventing direct comparison of error rates.
  • The complexity of scale design and subjective ratings limit the practical application of current assessment tools outside experimental settings.
  • Further research and the development of improved tools are essential for effective error analysis, self-assessment, continuous learning, and quality control in laparoscopic surgery.