Literature DB >> 15595595

[Risk and risk management in aviation].

Manfred Müller1.   

Abstract

RISK MANAGEMENT: The large proportion of human errors in aviation accidents suggested the solution--at first sight brilliant--to replace the fallible human being by an "infallible" digitally-operating computer. However, even after the introduction of the so-called HITEC-airplanes, the factor human error still accounts for 75% of all accidents. Thus, if the computer is ruled out as the ultimate safety system, how else can complex operations involving quick and difficult decisions be controlled? OPTIMIZED TEAM INTERACTION/PARALLEL CONNECTION OF THOUGHT MACHINES: Since a single person is always "highly error-prone", support and control have to be guaranteed by a second person. The independent work of mind results in a safety network that more efficiently cushions human errors. NON-PUNITIVE ERROR MANAGEMENT: To be able to tackle the actual problems, the open discussion of intervened errors must not be endangered by the threat of punishment. It has been shown in the past that progress is primarily achieved by investigating and following up mistakes, failures and catastrophes shortly after they happened. HUMAN FACTOR RESEARCH PROJECT: A comprehensive survey showed the following result: By far the most frequent safety-critical situation (37.8% of all events) consists of the following combination of risk factors: 1. A complication develops. 2. In this situation of increased stress a human error occurs. 3. The negative effects of the error cannot be corrected or eased because there are deficiencies in team interaction on the flight deck. This means, for example, that a negative social climate has the effect of a "turbocharger" when a human error occurs. It needs to be pointed out that a negative social climate is not identical with a dispute. In many cases the working climate is burdened without the responsible person even noticing it: A first negative impression, too much or too little respect, contempt, misunderstandings, not expressing unclear concern, etc. can considerably reduce the efficiency of a team.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15595595

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich        ISSN: 1431-7621


  2 in total

1.  [Intraoperative consulting. An easy addition to the surgical safety checklist for perioperative quality assurance].

Authors:  W Teichmann; S Petersen; D Thieme; W Rost; W Schwenk
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  Intraoperative consultation as an instrument of quality management.

Authors:  Wolfgang Teichmann; Wilm Rost; Daniel Thieme; Sven Petersen
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.352

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.