DeAnda A, Gaba D M
Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Anesth Analg. 1990 Jul;71(1):77-82. doi: 10.1213/00000539-199007000-00014.
In analyzing recordings of first- and second-year residents performing anesthesia in a comprehensive anesthesia simulation environment (CASE 1.2), we noted the occurrence of unplanned incidents. Utilizing a modified critical incident technique, we documented 132 unplanned incidents during 19 simulations (range 3-14, mean 6-947). Ninety-six (73%) of the incidents were considered simple incidents, and 36 (27%) were considered critical incidents. The incidents were classified as either human errors (65.9%), equipment failures (3%), fixation errors (20.5%), or unknown causes (10.6%). Human errors accounted for 87 of the incidents (range 1-12, mean 4.579), fixation errors accounted for 27 of the incidents (range 0-3, mean 1.421), and equipment failures accounted for only four of the incidents (range 0-2, mean 0.211). There was a significant (P less than 0.025) difference overall between resident groups, although no one class differed significantly from the others. The data confirm that most incidents are due to human error rather than equipment failure, and document fixation errors as a frequent cause of incidents in anesthesia. The data indicate that although most incidents are simple and do not progress into more serious incidents, human error remains ubiquitous, and that formal training and education should include recognition of events and the responses to them, in addition to prevention.
在分析一年级和二年级住院医师在综合麻醉模拟环境中(案例1.2)实施麻醉的记录时,我们注意到了意外事件的发生。利用改进的关键事件技术,我们在19次模拟中记录了132起意外事件(范围为3 - 14起,平均6 - 947起)。其中96起(73%)事件被认为是简单事件,36起(27%)被认为是关键事件。这些事件被分类为人为失误(65.9%)、设备故障(3%)、固定失误(20.5%)或原因不明(10.6%)。人为失误占87起事件(范围为1 - 12起,平均4.579起),固定失误占27起事件(范围为0 - 3起,平均1.421起),设备故障仅占4起事件(范围为0 - 2起,平均0.211起)。尽管各住院医师组之间没有哪一类存在显著差异,但总体上存在显著差异(P小于0.025)。数据证实大多数事件是由于人为失误而非设备故障,并记录了固定失误是麻醉中事件的常见原因。数据表明,尽管大多数事件是简单的,不会发展为更严重的事件,但人为失误仍然普遍存在,除了预防之外,正规培训和教育还应包括对事件的识别及其应对措施。