Suppr超能文献

是时候加大力度了。为何医疗保健领域的安全调查应更多地借鉴安全科学。

It's time to step it up. Why safety investigations in healthcare should look more to safety science.

作者信息

Wiig Siri, Braithwaite Jeffrey, Clay-Williams Robyn

机构信息

SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, University of Stavanger, Kjell Arholms gate 41, 4036 Stavanger, Norway.

Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Balaclava Rd, 2109 Sydney, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Qual Health Care. 2020 Jun 4;32(4):281-284. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa013.

Abstract

Accident models and theoretical foundations underpinning safety investigations are key to understanding how investigators construct causality and make recommendations. Safety science has devoted large efforts to investigating and theorizing about accidents. Why doesn't healthcare pay more interest to these theories when investigating healthcare accidents? We use established accident theories to suggest how these can support safety investigations in healthcare and provide new lenses to investigatory bodies. We reflect on examples from research and practice in healthcare systems and other high-risk industries. Investigation processes and reports serve multiple purposes. We argue there is an untapped improvement potential for healthcare safety investigations and suggest new ways of integrating different accident theoretical reflections with investigatory practice.

摘要

支撑安全调查的事故模型和理论基础是理解调查人员如何构建因果关系并提出建议的关键。安全科学在事故调查和理论化方面投入了大量精力。为什么医疗保健行业在调查医疗事故时对这些理论没有给予更多关注呢?我们运用已有的事故理论来探讨其如何支持医疗保健领域的安全调查,并为调查机构提供新的视角。我们思考了医疗系统和其他高风险行业的研究与实践中的例子。调查过程和报告具有多种目的。我们认为医疗安全调查存在尚未挖掘的改进潜力,并提出将不同事故理论思考与调查实践相结合的新方法。

相似文献

1
It's time to step it up. Why safety investigations in healthcare should look more to safety science.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2020 Jun 4;32(4):281-284. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa013.
2
Application of a human error framework to conduct train accident/incident investigations.
Accid Anal Prev. 2006 Mar;38(2):396-406. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.10.013. Epub 2005 Nov 28.
4
A proposed partnership for investigating device-related accidents.
J Healthc Risk Manag. 2007;27(1):13-7. doi: 10.1002/jhrm.5600270104.
5
Strategies for dealing with resistance to recommendations from accident investigations.
Accid Anal Prev. 2012 Mar;45:455-67. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.08.014. Epub 2011 Sep 16.
6
STAMP-Based HRA Considering Causality Within a Sociotechnical System: A Case of Minuteman III Missile Accident.
Hum Factors. 2015 May;57(3):375-96. doi: 10.1177/0018720814551555. Epub 2014 Oct 3.
7
Implementing recommendations from accident investigations: a case study of inter-organisational challenges.
Accid Anal Prev. 2013 Apr;53:133-41. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.01.010. Epub 2013 Jan 25.
8
DEEP SCOPE: A Framework for Safe Healthcare Design.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 22;18(15):7780. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18157780.
9
The investigation and analysis of critical incidents and adverse events in healthcare.
Health Technol Assess. 2005 May;9(19):1-143, iii. doi: 10.3310/hta9190.

引用本文的文献

2
Naming the "baby" or the "beast"? The importance of concepts and labels in healthcare safety investigation.
Front Public Health. 2023 Feb 10;11:1087268. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1087268. eCollection 2023.
3
Evaluating a system-wide, safety investigation in healthcare course in Norway: a qualitative study.
BMJ Open. 2022 Jun 17;12(6):e058134. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058134.
4
DEEP SCOPE: A Framework for Safe Healthcare Design.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 22;18(15):7780. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18157780.
5
Systems-based models for investigating patient safety incidents.
BJA Educ. 2021 Aug;21(8):307-313. doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2021.03.004. Epub 2021 Apr 28.
6
Beyond the corrective action hierarchy: A systems approach to organizational change.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2020 Sep 23;32(7):438-444. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa068.
7
The patient died: What about involvement in the investigation process?
Int J Qual Health Care. 2020 Jun 17;32(5):342-346. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa034.

本文引用的文献

1
Integrating systemic accident analysis into patient safety incident investigation practices.
Appl Ergon. 2018 Oct;72:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.04.012. Epub 2018 Apr 30.
2
Safety analysis over time: seven major changes to adverse event investigation.
Implement Sci. 2017 Dec 28;12(1):151. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0695-4.
3
Root-cause analysis: swatting at mosquitoes versus draining the swamp.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):350-353. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-006229. Epub 2017 Feb 21.
4
Our current approach to root cause analysis: is it contributing to our failure to improve patient safety?
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):381-387. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005991. Epub 2016 Dec 9.
5
The problem with root cause analysis.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):417-422. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005511. Epub 2016 Jun 23.
6
Resilient health care: turning patient safety on its head.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2015 Oct;27(5):418-20. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzv063. Epub 2015 Aug 20.
7
Policy and practice in the use of root cause analysis to investigate clinical adverse events: mind the gap.
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Jul;73(2):217-25. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.010. Epub 2011 May 27.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验