Literature DB >> 15692005

Safety in the operating theatre - Part 2: human error and organisational failure.

J Reason.   

Abstract

Over the past decade, anaesthetists and human factors specialists have worked together to find ways of minimising the human contribution to anaesthetic mishaps. As in the functionally similar fields of aviation, process control and military operations, it is found that errors are not confined to those at the "sharp end". In common with other complex and well defended technologies, anaesthetic accidents usually result from the often unforeseeable combination of human and organisational failures in the presence of some weakness or gap in the system's many barriers and safeguards. Psychological factors such as inattention, distraction and forgetfulness are the last and often the least manageable aspects of the accident sequence. Whereas individual unsafe acts are hard to predict and control, the organisational and contextual factors that give rise to them are present before the occurrence of an incident or accident. As such, they are prime candidates for treatment. Errors at the sharp end are symptomatic of both human fallibility and underlying organisational failings. Fallibility is here to stay. Organisational and local problems, in contrast, are both diagnosable and manageable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15692005      PMCID: PMC1743973     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care        ISSN: 1475-3898


  9 in total

1.  Anaesthetic machine checking practices. A survey.

Authors:  A H Mayor; J M Eaton
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  Accident analysis of large-scale technological disasters applied to an anaesthetic complication.

Authors:  C J Eagle; J M Davies; J Reason
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 5.063

Review 3.  Effect of outcome on physician judgments of appropriateness of care.

Authors:  R A Caplan; K L Posner; F W Cheney
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1991-04-17       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Are you getting the message? A look at the communication between the Department of Health, manufacturers and anaesthetists.

Authors:  P M Weir; M E Wilson
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 6.955

5.  The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. The "wrong drug" problem in anaesthesia: an analysis of 2000 incident reports.

Authors:  M Currie; P Mackay; C Morgan; W B Runciman; W J Russell; A Sellen; R K Webb; J A Williamson
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 1.669

6.  The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. System failure: an analysis of 2000 incident reports.

Authors:  W B Runciman; R K Webb; R Lee; R Holland
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 1.669

7.  The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. Human failure: an analysis of 2000 incident reports.

Authors:  J A Williamson; R K Webb; A Sellen; W B Runciman; J H Van der Walt
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 1.669

8.  Effects of information feedback and pulse oximetry on the incidence of anesthesia complications.

Authors:  J B Cooper; D J Cullen; R Nemeskal; D C Hoaglin; C C Gevirtz; M Csete; C Venable
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 7.892

9.  Reported significant observations during anaesthesia: a prospective analysis over an 18-month period.

Authors:  V Chopra; J G Bovill; J Spierdijk; F Koornneef
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 9.166

  9 in total
  29 in total

1.  'Slowing down when you should': initiators and influences of the transition from the routine to the effortful.

Authors:  Carol-anne Moulton; Glenn Regehr; Lorelei Lingard; Catherine Merritt; Helen Macrae
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Designing a tracking system based on cognitive theory of error.

Authors:  Hyung M Paek; Cynthia Brandt
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2005

3.  Intentionally harmful violations and patient safety: the example of Harold Shipman.

Authors:  Richard Baker; Brian Hurwitz
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Risk management in pediatric surgery.

Authors:  Girolamo Mattioli; Stefano Avanzini; Alessio Pini-Prato; Piero Buffa; Edoardo Guida; Giovanni Rapuzzi; Michele Torre; Valentina Rossi; Giovanni Montobbio; Ubaldo Rosati; Vincenzo Jasonni
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2009-06-27       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 5.  Teleconsulting in the time of a global pandemic: Application to anesthesia and technological considerations.

Authors:  Daniel S J Pang; Jessica M Pang; Opal-Jane Payne; Frazer M Clement; Terrie Faber
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 1.008

6.  How bedside feedback improves head-of-bed angle compliance for intubated patients.

Authors:  Geb W Thomas
Journal:  IISE Trans Healthc Syst Eng       Date:  2017-05-08

7.  Getting surgery right.

Authors:  John R Clarke; Janet Johnston; Edward D Finley
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  The reasons of the nursing staff to notify adverse events.

Authors:  Miriam Cristina Marques da Silva de Paiva; Regina Célia Popim; Marta Maria Melleiro; Daisy Maria Rizatto Tronchim; Silvana Andréa Molina Lima; Carmen Maria Casquel Monti Juliani
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2014-10

9.  Governing the surgical count through communication interactions: implications for patient safety.

Authors:  R Riley; E Manias; A Polglase
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-10

Review 10.  Measurement of errors in clinical laboratories.

Authors:  Rachna Agarwal
Journal:  Indian J Clin Biochem       Date:  2013-03-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.