Suppr超能文献

向高风险行业学习可能并非易事:一项关于医疗保健领域风险控制方法层级的定性研究。

Learning from high risk industries may not be straightforward: a qualitative study of the hierarchy of risk controls approach in healthcare.

作者信息

Liberati Elisa G, Peerally Mohammad Farhad, Dixon-Woods Mary

机构信息

THIS Institute (The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute), University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Clifford Allbutt Building, Cambridge CB2 OAH, UK.

Department of Health Sciences, Social Science Applied to Healthcare Improvement Research (SAPPHIRE) Group, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

出版信息

Int J Qual Health Care. 2018 Feb 1;30(1):39-43. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx163.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Though healthcare is often exhorted to learn from 'high-reliability' industries, adopting tools and techniques from those sectors may not be straightforward. We sought to examine the hierarchies of risk controls approach, used in high-risk industries to rank interventions according to supposed effectiveness in reducing risk, and widely advocated as appropriate for healthcare.

DESIGN

Classification of risk controls proposed by clinical teams following proactive detection of hazards in their clinical systems. Classification was based on a widely used hierarchy of controls developed by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A range of clinical settings in four English NHS hospitals.

RESULTS

The four clinical teams in our study planned a total of 42 risk controls aimed at addressing safety hazards. Most (n = 35) could be classed as administrative controls, thus qualifying among the weakest type of interventions according to the HoC approach. Six risk controls qualified as 'engineering' controls, i.e. the intermediate level of the hierarchy. Only risk control qualified as 'substitution', classified as the strongest type of intervention by the HoC.

CONCLUSIONS

Many risk controls introduced by clinical teams may cluster towards the apparently weaker end of an established hierarchy of controls. Less clear is whether the HoC approach as currently formulated is useful for the specifics of healthcare. Valuable opportunities for safety improvement may be lost if inappropriate hierarchical models are used to guide the selection of patient safety improvement interventions. Though learning from other industries may be useful, caution is needed.

摘要

目的

尽管医疗行业常被敦促向“高可靠性”行业学习,但采用这些行业的工具和技术可能并非易事。我们试图研究高风险行业中使用的风险控制方法层次结构,该结构根据降低风险的假定有效性对干预措施进行排序,并被广泛认为适用于医疗行业。

设计

临床团队在主动发现其临床系统中的危害后提出的风险控制分类。分类基于美国国家职业安全与健康研究所(NIOSH)制定的广泛使用的控制层次结构。

设置和参与者

英国四家国民健康服务(NHS)医院的一系列临床环境。

结果

我们研究中的四个临床团队共计划了42项旨在解决安全危害的风险控制措施。大多数(n = 35)可归类为行政控制措施,因此根据控制层次方法属于最弱的干预类型。六项风险控制措施符合“工程”控制措施的标准,即层次结构的中间级别。只有一项风险控制措施符合“替代”标准,被控制层次方法归类为最强的干预类型。

结论

临床团队引入的许多风险控制措施可能集中在既定控制层次结构中明显较弱的一端。目前制定的控制层次方法是否适用于医疗行业的具体情况尚不清楚。如果使用不合适的层次模型来指导患者安全改进干预措施的选择,可能会失去安全改进的宝贵机会。虽然向其他行业学习可能有用,但需要谨慎。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bff2/5890869/aea7f355fb47/mzx163f01.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验