Y
ears ago, Valerie Y.
Marsh, BSN, MSN,
DNP, CNOR, was
sure a sponge had
been left inside a
patient. "The surgeon swore it
wasn't in there, and he wasn't
going to reopen the incision to
find out," recalls Ms. Marsh, a clin-
ical assistant professor at
University of Michigan School of
Nursing in Ann Arbor. "I said,
'Listen, it's got to be in there. It's
no place else. Can we at least get
an X-ray?' So we did, and sure
enough, it was there."
Nowadays in University of
Michigan's ORs, it's not necessary
for nurses to request that sur-
geons X-ray in this case. They can
immediately determine if a
sponge is unaccounted for by
using high-tech sponge detection
systems that leverage the use of
special sponges containing either
barcodes or radiofrequency (RF)
tags to confirm an accurate
count, every time.
Both barcode and RF technolo-
gies are very good and reliable,
but they do have differences,
according to Robert M. Cima, MD,
a colon and rectal surgeon who is
a professor of surgery at Mayo
Clinic in Rochester, Minn. He
characterizes the barcode system
his institution uses as more of an accounting or
inventory system, where sponges are scanned in
and out to confirm the count, while RF systems
employ a wand or mattress topper that can detect
sponges left inside the patient or accidentally
tossed in the trash.
"The barcode device truly is an accounting of
sponges," says Dr. Cima. "It tells you how many
1 8 • S U P P L E M E N T
T O O U T P A T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E • O C T O B E R 2 0 2 0
Joe Paone | Senior Associate Editor
High-Tech Sponge Detection
This reassuring technology ensures no item
is left behind after the surgeon closes the incision.
DOUBLE CHECK Sponge detection and tracking technologies confirm that traditional manual counts are correct.
Pamela
Bevelhymer,
RN,
BSN,
CNOR
