Edmond W. Israelski Ph.D., C.H.F.P. (Program Manager), William H. Muto Ph.D., C.P.E. (Principal Human Factors Engineer)
{"title":"Human Factors Risk Management as a Way to Improve Medical Device Safety: A Case Study of the Therac 25 Radiation Therapy System","authors":"Edmond W. Israelski Ph.D., C.H.F.P. (Program Manager), William H. Muto Ph.D., C.P.E. (Principal Human Factors Engineer)","doi":"10.1016/S1549-3741(04)30082-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In a fatal incident in 1984 much discussed in the literature, a patient received 16,000 rads instead of the intended 180 rads when undergoing radiation treatment. This incident likely could have been prevented by the use of risk analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Risk Analysis</h3><p>Risk analysis techniques to identify use errors have received increasing attention in health care. Use errors are defined as a pattern of predictable human errors that can be attributable to inadequate or improper design. Among the most widely used of the risk analysis tools are Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and fault tree analysis (FTA). The Therac 25 Radiation Therapy System incidents involved a combination of technical failures (software and possibly hardware) combined with human behavior resulting in catastrophic radiation overdoses.</p></div><div><h3>Summary and Conclusions</h3><p>From a manufacturer’s perspective, FMEAs and FTAs are valuable methods to systematically evaluate a medical device design’s potential for inducing use errors. When these risk analyses are done early in the development cycle, potential faults and their resulting hazards are identifiable and much easier to mitigate with error-reducing designs. These risk management methods are excellent complements to other important user-centered design best practices.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":84970,"journal":{"name":"Joint Commission journal on quality and safety","volume":"30 12","pages":"Pages 689-695"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1549-3741(04)30082-1","citationCount":"49","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Joint Commission journal on quality and safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1549374104300821","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 49
Abstract
Background
In a fatal incident in 1984 much discussed in the literature, a patient received 16,000 rads instead of the intended 180 rads when undergoing radiation treatment. This incident likely could have been prevented by the use of risk analysis.
Risk Analysis
Risk analysis techniques to identify use errors have received increasing attention in health care. Use errors are defined as a pattern of predictable human errors that can be attributable to inadequate or improper design. Among the most widely used of the risk analysis tools are Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and fault tree analysis (FTA). The Therac 25 Radiation Therapy System incidents involved a combination of technical failures (software and possibly hardware) combined with human behavior resulting in catastrophic radiation overdoses.
Summary and Conclusions
From a manufacturer’s perspective, FMEAs and FTAs are valuable methods to systematically evaluate a medical device design’s potential for inducing use errors. When these risk analyses are done early in the development cycle, potential faults and their resulting hazards are identifiable and much easier to mitigate with error-reducing designs. These risk management methods are excellent complements to other important user-centered design best practices.