Systems Thinking in Mental Health Patient Safety: A Narrative Review of Complex Adaptive Systems

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Alexander Challinor, Oladayo Bifarin, Esmaeil Khedmati Morasae, Pooja Saini, Kathryn Berzins, Rajan Nathan
{"title":"Systems Thinking in Mental Health Patient Safety: A Narrative Review of Complex Adaptive Systems","authors":"Alexander Challinor,&nbsp;Oladayo Bifarin,&nbsp;Esmaeil Khedmati Morasae,&nbsp;Pooja Saini,&nbsp;Kathryn Berzins,&nbsp;Rajan Nathan","doi":"10.1111/jep.70080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite the growth of knowledge and interest into safety and quality in healthcare more generally, the exploration in mental healthcare has been deemed to be in a narrow isolated ‘world of its own’. It is possible that relatively little attention is being paid to the processes and interdependencies within the mental health patient safety system. This may result in simplistic static measures of what the system/organisation <i>has</i>, not what it does (or doesn't do). This can limit the potential for learning and affecting change. To investigate systems thinking in mental health patient safety, we conducted a narrative review into the extent of evidence streams supporting systems and complexity thinking approaches. We sourced a total of 89 reports for analysis with six themes identified. These themes included studies evaluating patient safety events that have occurred within mental healthcare, research that has investigated components of the safety system, and studies that have investigated how patient safety incidents are responded to, investigated, and learned from. The review evaluated the use of systems thinking and complexity research in patient safety, and research encapsulating patient and carer involvement. Most research has focused on the analysis of historic approaches to incident investigation and on system-based factors of patient safety, with little attention being paid to systems and complexity thinking approaches. The relationships between components were often ignored in the non-systemic studies sourced, with relationships between components not investigated and unknown. With policymakers recommending changes in patient safety practice through system-based approaches, it is important that its implementation is evaluated robustly with consideration of the multiple levels of the healthcare system. Future research should aim to incorporate systems-thinking approaches to model the safety system, and to improve our understanding of the highly interconnected technical and social entities that dynamically produce emergent behaviour across the system.</p>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70080","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the growth of knowledge and interest into safety and quality in healthcare more generally, the exploration in mental healthcare has been deemed to be in a narrow isolated ‘world of its own’. It is possible that relatively little attention is being paid to the processes and interdependencies within the mental health patient safety system. This may result in simplistic static measures of what the system/organisation has, not what it does (or doesn't do). This can limit the potential for learning and affecting change. To investigate systems thinking in mental health patient safety, we conducted a narrative review into the extent of evidence streams supporting systems and complexity thinking approaches. We sourced a total of 89 reports for analysis with six themes identified. These themes included studies evaluating patient safety events that have occurred within mental healthcare, research that has investigated components of the safety system, and studies that have investigated how patient safety incidents are responded to, investigated, and learned from. The review evaluated the use of systems thinking and complexity research in patient safety, and research encapsulating patient and carer involvement. Most research has focused on the analysis of historic approaches to incident investigation and on system-based factors of patient safety, with little attention being paid to systems and complexity thinking approaches. The relationships between components were often ignored in the non-systemic studies sourced, with relationships between components not investigated and unknown. With policymakers recommending changes in patient safety practice through system-based approaches, it is important that its implementation is evaluated robustly with consideration of the multiple levels of the healthcare system. Future research should aim to incorporate systems-thinking approaches to model the safety system, and to improve our understanding of the highly interconnected technical and social entities that dynamically produce emergent behaviour across the system.

心理健康病人安全的系统思考:复杂适应系统的叙述回顾
尽管人们对医疗保健安全和质量的知识和兴趣越来越普遍,但在精神卫生保健方面的探索被认为是在一个狭窄孤立的“自己的世界”中。可能对精神卫生患者安全系统内的过程和相互依赖关系给予的关注相对较少。这可能导致对系统/组织拥有什么的简单的静态度量,而不是它做了什么(或没有做什么)。这可能会限制学习和影响变革的潜力。为了研究精神卫生患者安全中的系统思维,我们对支持系统和复杂性思维方法的证据流的程度进行了叙述回顾。我们共采购了89份报告进行分析,确定了6个主题。这些主题包括评估在精神卫生保健中发生的患者安全事件的研究,调查安全系统组成部分的研究,以及调查如何应对、调查和从中吸取教训的研究。该综述评估了系统思维和复杂性研究在患者安全中的应用,以及对患者和护理人员参与的研究。大多数研究都集中在分析事件调查的历史方法和基于系统的患者安全因素,很少关注系统和复杂性思维方法。在非系统研究中,组件之间的关系经常被忽略,组件之间的关系没有被调查和未知。随着政策制定者建议通过基于系统的方法改变患者安全实践,重要的是要考虑到医疗保健系统的多个层面,对其实施进行强有力的评估。未来的研究应该致力于整合系统思维方法来模拟安全系统,并提高我们对高度互联的技术和社会实体的理解,这些技术和社会实体在整个系统中动态地产生紧急行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信