{"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, 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 >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, 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 >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}
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.
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.