A facility reported that the mayfield composite series skull clamp (a3059) was very stiff and some wearing/rubbing when pulling the clamp apart was noted.The clamp was used on a a patient, and when moving the patient, a laceration to the head occurred.The patient required staples/sutures to the laceration.Surgical delay is unknown.
|
Additional information was received indicating the following: 1.Please describe what part exactly is stiff and which part was moving or caused the laceration if possible.Answer: the two halves of the actual clamp were quite stiff, however i noticed when looking at the clamp the day after the incident (i wasn¿t present at the time of the incident) that the serial numbers for the 2 halves of the clamp didn¿t match.After finding the matching half and putting the clamp together there was no longer any stiffness.2.Which pin side caused the laceration (single/double?) answer: the staff involved were also unsure as to which part of the clamp caused the laceration, but seeing as there was only 1 laceration i feel it must be the side with only 1 pin? 3.Were mayfield pins used? answer: yes, we only stock mayfield pins.4.Moving of the patient ¿ please describe the positioning of the patient.Answer: prone, incident occurred while transferring from supine to prone position while in skull pins.
|
Updated fields: d4, d9, g3, g6, h2, h3, h4, h6, h10.Additional information: 1.Was there a delay in surgery due to product problem? if yes, how long? yes unsure how long.2.Size and location of the laceration? right side of the skull, information on size not provided.3.Patient outcome? bleeding ceased once staples applied.Patient received staples/sutures to laceration.Investigation findings: the mayfield modified skull clamp (a1059) was returned for evaluation: device history record (dhr) - the dhr was reviewed and shows no abnormalities related to the reported failure.Failure analysis - evaluation found no device deficiencies that would have contributed to the reported complaint.Repairs team could not duplicate slippage, and no other fault/failure of the device was found.However, annual preventative maintenance is recommended.Root cause - probable root cause of patient laceration is improper or suboptimal positioning of the skull clamp.No further investigation is required based on the acceptability of risk and no adverse trends were identified.This will be monitored and trended going forward.At present, we consider this complaint to be closed.
|