Suppr超能文献

实施人为因素方法进行根本原因分析:工具、流程和策略。

Implementing a human factors approach to RCA : Tools, processes and strategies.

机构信息

Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1513 University Ave, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.

Department of Human Factors and Behavioral Neurobiology, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL, 32115, USA.

出版信息

J Healthc Risk Manag. 2021 Jul;41(1):31-46. doi: 10.1002/jhrm.21454. Epub 2020 Dec 19.

Abstract

Root Cause Analysis and Action (RCA ) guidelines offer fundamental improvements to traditional RCA. Yet, these guidelines lack robust methods to support a human factors analysis of patient harm events and development of systems-level interventions. We recently integrated a complement of human factors tools into the RCA process to address this gap. These tools include the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), the Human Factors Intervention Matrix (HFIX), and a multiple-criterion decision tool called FACES, for selecting effective HFIX solutions. We describe each of these tools and illustrate how they can be integrated into RCA to create a robust human factors RCA process called HFACS-RCA . We also present qualitative results from an 18-month implementation study within a large academic health center. Results demonstrate how HFACS-RCA can foster a more comprehensive, human factors analysis of serious patient harm events and the identification of broader system interventions. Following HFACS-RCA implementation, RCA team members (risk managers and quality improvement advisors) also experienced greater satisfaction in their work, leadership gained more trust in RCA findings and recommendations, and the transparency of the RCA process increased. Effective strategies for overcoming implementation barriers, including changes in roles, responsibilities and workload will also be presented.

摘要

根本原因分析和行动(RCA)指南为传统 RCA 提供了根本改进。然而,这些指南缺乏强有力的方法来支持对患者伤害事件的人为因素分析和系统层面干预措施的制定。我们最近将一套人为因素工具集成到 RCA 流程中,以解决这一差距。这些工具包括人为因素分析和分类系统(HFACS)、人为因素干预矩阵(HFIX)和一种称为 FACES 的多标准决策工具,用于选择有效的 HFIX 解决方案。我们描述了这些工具中的每一个,并说明了如何将它们集成到 RCA 中,以创建一个称为 HFACS-RCA 的强大人为因素 RCA 流程。我们还介绍了在一家大型学术医疗中心进行的为期 18 个月的实施研究的定性结果。结果表明,HFACS-RCA 如何促进对严重患者伤害事件的更全面、人为因素分析以及更广泛的系统干预措施的确定。在实施 HFACS-RCA 之后,RCA 团队成员(风险经理和质量改进顾问)对他们的工作也更加满意,领导层对 RCA 的发现和建议更加信任,并且 RCA 流程的透明度也提高了。我们还将介绍克服实施障碍的有效策略,包括角色、责任和工作量的变化。

相似文献

10
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

本文引用的文献

7
The problem with '5 whys'.“五个为什么”的问题。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Aug;26(8):671-677. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005849. Epub 2016 Sep 2.
8
The problem with root cause analysis.根本原因分析的问题。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):417-422. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005511. Epub 2016 Jun 23.

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