超越错误:对严重不良事件中人为因素的定性研究。

Q3 Medicine
Chenjerai Mujuru MBA, Carmelle Peisah MBBS, MD, FRANZCP
{"title":"超越错误:对严重不良事件中人为因素的定性研究。","authors":"Chenjerai Mujuru MBA,&nbsp;Carmelle Peisah MBBS, MD, FRANZCP","doi":"10.1002/jhrm.21583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The field of healthcare quality and safety has been informed by the study of Human Factors contributing to adverse events. Hitherto, much of the study of Human Factors has been focused on a narrow lens of human error, identifying cognitive-based or knowledge-based errors and cognitive processes such as loss of situational awareness contributing to error. While these factors are important, this narrow approach fails to consider the complexity of relational and systemic factors that also contribute to adverse events. We aimed to explore the relational and systemic human factors, including shared clinician attitudes and behavior, that contribute to serious adverse patient events in a public health setting. The study, set in a metropolitan local health district in New South Wales, Australia, was conducted using a retrospective qualitative multi-incident content analysis design. Serious adverse event reviews (SAER) over 6 months (2022–2023) were subject to qualitative content analysis until data saturation was reached. Data saturation reached at 20 reports. Emergent themes related to human factors in serious adverse events included: (i) delays and inertia—with a subtheme of inertia of ageism; (ii) “All-or-nothing” approach to end-of-life care and planning; (iii) communication lapses; and (iv) implementation gap between standards and practice. Error-based incidents accounted for only 35% of the serious adverse events examined. The sample studied involved mostly (65%) male patients, with a mean age of 69 (70% aged &gt;65), managed across the gamut of specialties, with the most common incident being the management of acutely deteriorating patients. In conclusion, there is more to Human Factors in adverse events than cognitive or knowledge-based error. While identifying and correcting errors is absolutely essential, we need adjunctive “soft measures” to address clinical attitudes, behaviors, and relationships in health care, particularly in increasingly complex, fraught, and stressful health care environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":39819,"journal":{"name":"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management","volume":"44 2","pages":"7-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jhrm.21583","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond error: A qualitative study of human factors in serious adverse events\",\"authors\":\"Chenjerai Mujuru MBA,&nbsp;Carmelle Peisah MBBS, MD, FRANZCP\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhrm.21583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The field of healthcare quality and safety has been informed by the study of Human Factors contributing to adverse events. Hitherto, much of the study of Human Factors has been focused on a narrow lens of human error, identifying cognitive-based or knowledge-based errors and cognitive processes such as loss of situational awareness contributing to error. While these factors are important, this narrow approach fails to consider the complexity of relational and systemic factors that also contribute to adverse events. We aimed to explore the relational and systemic human factors, including shared clinician attitudes and behavior, that contribute to serious adverse patient events in a public health setting. The study, set in a metropolitan local health district in New South Wales, Australia, was conducted using a retrospective qualitative multi-incident content analysis design. Serious adverse event reviews (SAER) over 6 months (2022–2023) were subject to qualitative content analysis until data saturation was reached. Data saturation reached at 20 reports. Emergent themes related to human factors in serious adverse events included: (i) delays and inertia—with a subtheme of inertia of ageism; (ii) “All-or-nothing” approach to end-of-life care and planning; (iii) communication lapses; and (iv) implementation gap between standards and practice. Error-based incidents accounted for only 35% of the serious adverse events examined. The sample studied involved mostly (65%) male patients, with a mean age of 69 (70% aged &gt;65), managed across the gamut of specialties, with the most common incident being the management of acutely deteriorating patients. In conclusion, there is more to Human Factors in adverse events than cognitive or knowledge-based error. While identifying and correcting errors is absolutely essential, we need adjunctive “soft measures” to address clinical attitudes, behaviors, and relationships in health care, particularly in increasingly complex, fraught, and stressful health care environments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management\",\"volume\":\"44 2\",\"pages\":\"7-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jhrm.21583\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhrm.21583\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhrm.21583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对导致不良事件的人为因素的研究为医疗质量和安全领域提供了信息。迄今为止,对人为因素的研究大多集中在狭义的人为错误上,认为认知错误或知识错误以及认知过程(如丧失情景意识)是导致错误的原因。这些因素固然重要,但这种狭隘的研究方法没有考虑到关系因素和系统因素的复杂性,而这些因素也是造成不良事件的原因。我们旨在探索在公共卫生环境中导致严重不良患者事件的关系和系统性人为因素,包括临床医生的共同态度和行为。这项研究以澳大利亚新南威尔士州的一个大都市地方卫生区为背景,采用回顾性定性多事件内容分析设计。对 6 个月(2022-2023 年)内的严重不良事件回顾(SAER)进行定性内容分析,直至数据达到饱和。20 份报告达到数据饱和。与严重不良事件中的人为因素有关的新主题包括(i) 延迟和惰性--副主题是年龄歧视的惰性;(ii) 临终关怀和规划的 "全有或全无 "方法;(iii) 沟通缺失;(iv) 标准和实践之间的执行差距。在所研究的严重不良事件中,错误事件仅占 35%。所研究的样本大多(65%)涉及男性患者,平均年龄为 69 岁(70% 年龄大于 65 岁),管理范围涉及各个专科,最常见的事件是对病情急剧恶化患者的管理。总之,不良事件中的人为因素不仅仅是认知或知识错误。虽然识别和纠正错误是绝对必要的,但我们还需要辅助性的 "软措施 "来解决医疗保健中的临床态度、行为和关系问题,尤其是在日益复杂、紧张和压力巨大的医疗保健环境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond error: A qualitative study of human factors in serious adverse events

The field of healthcare quality and safety has been informed by the study of Human Factors contributing to adverse events. Hitherto, much of the study of Human Factors has been focused on a narrow lens of human error, identifying cognitive-based or knowledge-based errors and cognitive processes such as loss of situational awareness contributing to error. While these factors are important, this narrow approach fails to consider the complexity of relational and systemic factors that also contribute to adverse events. We aimed to explore the relational and systemic human factors, including shared clinician attitudes and behavior, that contribute to serious adverse patient events in a public health setting. The study, set in a metropolitan local health district in New South Wales, Australia, was conducted using a retrospective qualitative multi-incident content analysis design. Serious adverse event reviews (SAER) over 6 months (2022–2023) were subject to qualitative content analysis until data saturation was reached. Data saturation reached at 20 reports. Emergent themes related to human factors in serious adverse events included: (i) delays and inertia—with a subtheme of inertia of ageism; (ii) “All-or-nothing” approach to end-of-life care and planning; (iii) communication lapses; and (iv) implementation gap between standards and practice. Error-based incidents accounted for only 35% of the serious adverse events examined. The sample studied involved mostly (65%) male patients, with a mean age of 69 (70% aged >65), managed across the gamut of specialties, with the most common incident being the management of acutely deteriorating patients. In conclusion, there is more to Human Factors in adverse events than cognitive or knowledge-based error. While identifying and correcting errors is absolutely essential, we need adjunctive “soft measures” to address clinical attitudes, behaviors, and relationships in health care, particularly in increasingly complex, fraught, and stressful health care environments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The Journal of Healthcare Risk Management is published quarterly by the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management (ASHRM). The purpose of the journal is to publish research, trends, and new developments in the field of healthcare risk management with the ultimate goal of advancing safe and trusted patient-centered healthcare delivery and promoting proactive and innovative management of organization-wide risk. The journal focuses on insightful, peer-reviewed content that relates to patient safety, emergency preparedness, insurance, legal, leadership, and other timely healthcare risk management issues.
×
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