Integrating human factors research and surgery: a review.

Daniel Shouhed, Bruce Gewertz, Doug Wiegmann, Ken Catchpole
{"title":"Integrating human factors research and surgery: a review.","authors":"Daniel Shouhed,&nbsp;Bruce Gewertz,&nbsp;Doug Wiegmann,&nbsp;Ken Catchpole","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2013.596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide a review of human factors research within the context of surgery.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We searched PubMed for relevant studies published from the earliest available date through February 29, 2012.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>The search was performed using the following keywords: human factors, surgery, errors, teamwork, communication, stress, disruptions, interventions, checklists, briefings, and training. Additional articles were identified by a manual search of the references from the key articles. As 2 human factors specialists, a senior clinician, and a junior clinician, we carefully selected the most appropriate exemplars of research findings with specific relevance to surgical error and safety.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Seventy-seven articles of relevance were selected and reviewed in detail. Opinion pieces and editorials were disregarded; the focus was solely on articles based on empirical evidence, with a particular emphasis on prospectively designed studies.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>The themes that emerged related to the development of human factors theories, the application of those theories within surgery, a specific interest in the concept of flow, and the theoretical basis and value of human-related interventions for improving safety and flow in surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite increased awareness of safety, errors routinely continue to occur in surgical care. Disruptions in the flow of an operation, such as teamwork and communication failures, contribute significantly to such adverse events. While it is apparent that some incidence of human error is unavoidable, there is much evidence in medicine and other fields that systems can be better designed to prevent or detect errors before a patient is harmed. The complexity of factors leading to surgical errors requires collaborations between surgeons and human factors experts to carry out the proper prospective and observational studies. Only when we are guided by this valid and real-world data can useful interventions be identified and implemented.</p>","PeriodicalId":8298,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1141-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.596","citationCount":"74","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 74

Abstract

Objective: To provide a review of human factors research within the context of surgery.

Data sources: We searched PubMed for relevant studies published from the earliest available date through February 29, 2012.

Study selection: The search was performed using the following keywords: human factors, surgery, errors, teamwork, communication, stress, disruptions, interventions, checklists, briefings, and training. Additional articles were identified by a manual search of the references from the key articles. As 2 human factors specialists, a senior clinician, and a junior clinician, we carefully selected the most appropriate exemplars of research findings with specific relevance to surgical error and safety.

Data extraction: Seventy-seven articles of relevance were selected and reviewed in detail. Opinion pieces and editorials were disregarded; the focus was solely on articles based on empirical evidence, with a particular emphasis on prospectively designed studies.

Data synthesis: The themes that emerged related to the development of human factors theories, the application of those theories within surgery, a specific interest in the concept of flow, and the theoretical basis and value of human-related interventions for improving safety and flow in surgery.

Conclusions: Despite increased awareness of safety, errors routinely continue to occur in surgical care. Disruptions in the flow of an operation, such as teamwork and communication failures, contribute significantly to such adverse events. While it is apparent that some incidence of human error is unavoidable, there is much evidence in medicine and other fields that systems can be better designed to prevent or detect errors before a patient is harmed. The complexity of factors leading to surgical errors requires collaborations between surgeons and human factors experts to carry out the proper prospective and observational studies. Only when we are guided by this valid and real-world data can useful interventions be identified and implemented.

整合人因研究与外科:综述。
目的:综述外科中人为因素的研究进展。数据来源:我们在PubMed检索了从最早的可用日期到2012年2月29日发表的相关研究。研究选择:使用以下关键词进行搜索:人为因素、手术、错误、团队合作、沟通、压力、干扰、干预、检查清单、简报和培训。通过对关键文章的参考文献进行人工检索,确定了其他文章。作为两名人为因素专家,一名高级临床医生和一名初级临床医生,我们精心挑选了最合适的研究结果范例,这些研究结果与手术错误和安全性有特定的相关性。数据提取:选取了77篇相关的文章,并对其进行了详细的审查。评论文章和社论被忽视;重点仅仅是基于经验证据的文章,特别强调前瞻性设计的研究。数据综合:出现的主题与人为因素理论的发展,这些理论在外科手术中的应用,对流动概念的特定兴趣,以及提高手术安全性和流动的人为干预的理论基础和价值有关。结论:尽管安全意识提高了,但在外科护理中仍经常发生错误。作业流程中的中断,如团队合作和沟通失败,是造成此类不良事件的重要原因。虽然很明显,一些人为错误的发生是不可避免的,但在医学和其他领域有很多证据表明,可以更好地设计系统,以便在患者受到伤害之前预防或发现错误。导致手术失误的因素的复杂性需要外科医生和人为因素专家之间的合作,以开展适当的前瞻性和观察性研究。只有在这些有效和真实数据的指导下,我们才能确定和实施有用的干预措施。
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
Archives of Surgery
Archives of Surgery 医学-外科
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
×
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