The Veterans Affairs Root Cause Analysis System in Action

James P. Bagian MD, PE (Director), John Gosbee MD (Director), Caryl Z. Lee RN, MSN (Program Manager), Linda Williams RN, MSI (Information Technology Specialist), Scott D. McKnight PhD (Statistician), Dea M. Mannos MPH (Program Analyst)
{"title":"The Veterans Affairs Root Cause Analysis System in Action","authors":"James P. Bagian MD, PE (Director),&nbsp;John Gosbee MD (Director),&nbsp;Caryl Z. Lee RN, MSN (Program Manager),&nbsp;Linda Williams RN, MSI (Information Technology Specialist),&nbsp;Scott D. McKnight PhD (Statistician),&nbsp;Dea M. Mannos MPH (Program Analyst)","doi":"10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28057-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The patient safety program in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began in 1998, when the National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) was established to lead the effort on a day-to-day basis. NCPS provides the structure, training, and tools, and VA facilities provide front-line expertise, feedback about the process, and root cause analysis (RCA) of adverse events and close calls.</p></div><div><h3>Monitoring the process</h3><p>Facility patient safety managers determine the disposition of adverse events and close calls occurring at their facilities. They use a safety assessment code (SAC) to prioritize the actual and potential severity and frequency of an event.</p></div><div><h3>Before-and-after study</h3><p>Before the new RCA system was implemented in 2000, the VA used another adverse event reporting system, focused review (FR). A comparison of the two processes indicates that the RCA process has shifted analyses of adverse events toward a human factors engineering approach—entailing a search for system vulnerabilities rather than human errors and other less actionable root causes.</p></div><div><h3>Case examples</h3><p>Two case examples—on hazards in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) room and on a cardiac pacemaker malfunction—illustrate how the RCA system works in actual operation. The cases illustrate that broadly applicable, high-impact actions can result from a thorough RCA process.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>NCPS monitors the quality and completeness of RCAs through the immediate review and feedback process. Still to be investigated is the effectiveness of RCA actions addressing the hypothesized root causes and contributing factors of the close calls and adverse events.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":79382,"journal":{"name":"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement","volume":"28 10","pages":"Pages 531-545"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28057-8","citationCount":"210","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1070324102280578","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 210

Abstract

Background

The patient safety program in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began in 1998, when the National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) was established to lead the effort on a day-to-day basis. NCPS provides the structure, training, and tools, and VA facilities provide front-line expertise, feedback about the process, and root cause analysis (RCA) of adverse events and close calls.

Monitoring the process

Facility patient safety managers determine the disposition of adverse events and close calls occurring at their facilities. They use a safety assessment code (SAC) to prioritize the actual and potential severity and frequency of an event.

Before-and-after study

Before the new RCA system was implemented in 2000, the VA used another adverse event reporting system, focused review (FR). A comparison of the two processes indicates that the RCA process has shifted analyses of adverse events toward a human factors engineering approach—entailing a search for system vulnerabilities rather than human errors and other less actionable root causes.

Case examples

Two case examples—on hazards in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) room and on a cardiac pacemaker malfunction—illustrate how the RCA system works in actual operation. The cases illustrate that broadly applicable, high-impact actions can result from a thorough RCA process.

Discussion

NCPS monitors the quality and completeness of RCAs through the immediate review and feedback process. Still to be investigated is the effectiveness of RCA actions addressing the hypothesized root causes and contributing factors of the close calls and adverse events.

退伍军人事务根本原因分析系统在行动
退伍军人事务部(VA)的患者安全项目始于1998年,当时成立了国家患者安全中心(NCPS),负责日常工作。NCPS提供结构、培训和工具,VA设施提供一线专业知识、流程反馈以及不良事件和近距离呼叫的根本原因分析(RCA)。监控过程设施患者安全管理人员决定在其设施中发生的不良事件和紧急呼叫的处置。他们使用安全评估代码(SAC)来优先考虑事件的实际和潜在严重性和频率。在新的RCA系统于2000年实施之前,VA使用了另一种不良事件报告系统,即重点审查(FR)。对这两个过程的比较表明,RCA过程已经将不利事件的分析转向了人为因素工程方法——需要搜索系统漏洞,而不是人为错误和其他不太可行的根本原因。两个案例-磁共振成像(MRI)室的危险和心脏起搏器故障-说明了RCA系统在实际操作中的工作原理。这些案例说明,广泛适用的、高影响的行动可以从彻底的RCA过程中产生。ncps通过即时评审和反馈过程监控rca的质量和完整性。仍有待调查的是RCA行动的有效性,以解决假想的根本原因和促成近距离呼叫和不良事件的因素。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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