Human factors and patient safety in undergraduate healthcare education: A systematic review

IF 1.6
Human factors in healthcare Pub Date : 2022-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-07-09 DOI:10.1016/j.hfh.2022.100019
Patricia Sheehan , Aislinn Joy , Aoife Fleming , Helen Vosper , Suzanne McCarthy
{"title":"Human factors and patient safety in undergraduate healthcare education: A systematic review","authors":"Patricia Sheehan ,&nbsp;Aislinn Joy ,&nbsp;Aoife Fleming ,&nbsp;Helen Vosper ,&nbsp;Suzanne McCarthy","doi":"10.1016/j.hfh.2022.100019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021–2030 presents Human Factors (HF) capacity development as a core strategic objective. HF has been identified as a suitable framework for delivery of patient safety education. Findings of a previous review identified a lack of formally articulated patient safety curricula with Human Factors and Ergonomics largely absent.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>to capture the extent to which HF is currently reported in the context of undergraduate healthcare curricula, and to characterise how it is reported using SEIPS 101.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Using a publication timeframe from 2016–2021 A systematic search was conducted using the following databases: Embase, Pubmed, Scopus, CINAHL and Eric. Relevant websites were searched for grey literature. The PETT (People, Environments, Tools and Tasks) component of SEIPS 101 was chosen as framework for data extraction and analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>25 papers were included in the review. In comparison with a previous review, findings demonstrate increased reporting of HF in the context of undergraduate healthcare curricula. SEIPS 101 helped identify both barriers and opportunities relating to HF implementation under the headings of people, environment, tools and tasks. Barriers included lack of shared safety language, lack of faculty expertise in patient safety (PS) as well as the lack of appropriate HF based competency framework to guide curriculum development. Opportunities included increased organisational collaboration between academic and clinical settings with respect to PS teaching. Educational accreditation bodies, and the professional regulators who influence them, were identified as important drivers of curricular change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93564,"journal":{"name":"Human factors in healthcare","volume":"2 ","pages":"Article 100019"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772501422000161/pdfft?md5=0ec4fa9a4f0bb55389c2179806a43b94&pid=1-s2.0-S2772501422000161-main.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human factors in healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772501422000161","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background

WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021–2030 presents Human Factors (HF) capacity development as a core strategic objective. HF has been identified as a suitable framework for delivery of patient safety education. Findings of a previous review identified a lack of formally articulated patient safety curricula with Human Factors and Ergonomics largely absent.

Objective

to capture the extent to which HF is currently reported in the context of undergraduate healthcare curricula, and to characterise how it is reported using SEIPS 101.

Methods

Using a publication timeframe from 2016–2021 A systematic search was conducted using the following databases: Embase, Pubmed, Scopus, CINAHL and Eric. Relevant websites were searched for grey literature. The PETT (People, Environments, Tools and Tasks) component of SEIPS 101 was chosen as framework for data extraction and analysis.

Results

25 papers were included in the review. In comparison with a previous review, findings demonstrate increased reporting of HF in the context of undergraduate healthcare curricula. SEIPS 101 helped identify both barriers and opportunities relating to HF implementation under the headings of people, environment, tools and tasks. Barriers included lack of shared safety language, lack of faculty expertise in patient safety (PS) as well as the lack of appropriate HF based competency framework to guide curriculum development. Opportunities included increased organisational collaboration between academic and clinical settings with respect to PS teaching. Educational accreditation bodies, and the professional regulators who influence them, were identified as important drivers of curricular change.

人因因素与大学生健康教育中的患者安全:一项系统综述
世卫组织《2021-2030年全球患者安全行动计划》将人为因素(HF)能力建设作为核心战略目标。HF已被确定为提供患者安全教育的合适框架。先前的一项综述发现,缺乏正式明确的患者安全课程,主要缺乏人为因素和人体工程学。目的了解目前在本科医疗保健课程中心衰的报道程度,并描述如何使用SEIPS 101进行报道。方法采用Embase、Pubmed、Scopus、CINAHL、Eric等数据库进行系统检索,检索时间为2016-2021年。在相关网站搜索灰色文献。SEIPS 101的PETT (People, Environments, Tools and Tasks)组件被选为数据提取和分析的框架。结果共纳入25篇论文。与之前的综述相比,研究结果表明,在本科医疗保健课程背景下,心衰的报告有所增加。SEIPS 101有助于在人员、环境、工具和任务的标题下确定与HF实施有关的障碍和机会。障碍包括缺乏共同的安全语言,缺乏教师在患者安全(PS)方面的专业知识,以及缺乏适当的基于HF的能力框架来指导课程开发。机会包括在PS教学方面增加学术和临床环境之间的组织合作。教育认证机构和影响他们的专业监管机构被认为是课程改革的重要推动力。
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
Human factors in healthcare
Human factors in healthcare Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Occupational Therapy
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
145 days
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书