The problem with making Safety-II work in healthcare

M. Verhagen, M. D. de Vos, M. Sujan, J. Hamming
{"title":"The problem with making Safety-II work in healthcare","authors":"M. Verhagen, M. D. de Vos, M. Sujan, J. Hamming","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2021-014396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial reuse. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. INTRODUCTION Patient safety is typically assessed by the frequency of adverse events or incidents, which means we seek to determine safety by its absence rather than its presence. The SafetyII perspective aspires to overcome this paradox by bringing into focus situations where safety is actually present, that is, in everyday work that usually goes well. Central to SafetyII is the notion that, in complex systems such as healthcare, safety is a consequence of collective efforts to adapt to dynamic conditions and uncertainty, rather than the natural state of a system where nothing untoward happens. This type of thinking has been met with significant interest and enthusiasm in healthcare, because it feeds increased appreciation for the fact that healthcare workers continuously ensure that most patients receive safe and highquality care in challenging circumstances. However, despite its appeal and potential, significant challenges remain for the fruitful interpretation and application of the SafetyII perspective in healthcare, which could give rise to misinterpretations, misuse and a missed opportunity for the potential enrichment of quality and safety practices in healthcare.","PeriodicalId":49653,"journal":{"name":"Quality & Safety in Health Care","volume":"31 1","pages":"402 - 408"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality & Safety in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2021-014396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial reuse. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. INTRODUCTION Patient safety is typically assessed by the frequency of adverse events or incidents, which means we seek to determine safety by its absence rather than its presence. The SafetyII perspective aspires to overcome this paradox by bringing into focus situations where safety is actually present, that is, in everyday work that usually goes well. Central to SafetyII is the notion that, in complex systems such as healthcare, safety is a consequence of collective efforts to adapt to dynamic conditions and uncertainty, rather than the natural state of a system where nothing untoward happens. This type of thinking has been met with significant interest and enthusiasm in healthcare, because it feeds increased appreciation for the fact that healthcare workers continuously ensure that most patients receive safe and highquality care in challenging circumstances. However, despite its appeal and potential, significant challenges remain for the fruitful interpretation and application of the SafetyII perspective in healthcare, which could give rise to misinterpretations, misuse and a missed opportunity for the potential enrichment of quality and safety practices in healthcare.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使Safety-II在医疗保健领域发挥作用的问题
©作者(或其雇主)2022。禁止商业重用。请参阅权利和权限。英国医学杂志出版。患者安全通常是通过不良事件或事件的频率来评估的,这意味着我们试图通过其不存在而不是存在来确定安全性。SafetyII的观点希望通过关注安全实际存在的情况来克服这种矛盾,也就是说,在日常工作中通常进行得很顺利。safety ii的核心概念是,在医疗保健等复杂系统中,安全是集体努力适应动态条件和不确定性的结果,而不是没有任何不幸发生的系统的自然状态。这种类型的想法在医疗保健领域引起了极大的兴趣和热情,因为它使人们越来越认识到这样一个事实,即医疗保健工作者不断确保大多数患者在具有挑战性的环境中获得安全和高质量的护理。然而,尽管它具有吸引力和潜力,但在医疗保健中卓有成效地解释和应用SafetyII观点仍然面临重大挑战,这可能导致误解、误用和错过潜在的丰富医疗保健质量和安全实践的机会。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Quality & Safety in Health Care
Quality & Safety in Health Care 医学-卫生保健
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Accuracy of telephone triage for predicting adverse outcomes in suspected COVID-19: an observational cohort study. Quality framework for remote antenatal care: qualitative study with women, healthcare professionals and system-level stakeholders. Addressing social determinants of health in primary care: a quasi-experimental study using unannounced standardised patients to evaluate the impact of audit/feedback on physicians' rates of identifying and responding to social needs. Reporting on implementation trials with null findings: the need for concurrent process evaluation reporting. Antibiotic documentation: death by a thousand clicks.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1