Literature DB >> 36032651

Exploring Goal Conflicts and How They Are Managed in a Biomedical Laboratory Using Rasmussen's Model of Boundaries.

Viji Vijayan1, Anthony John Smoker2.   

Abstract

Introduction: Occupational health and safety management systems are widely used as a systematic approach to managing occupational health and safety. However, sometimes they are restrictive and underspecified to deal with dynamic workplace demands. Rasmussen used a model of boundaries to conceptualize this dynamic model of safety, where the space of possibilities lay within 3 boundaries and workers used various means to stay within the boundaries to remain both productive and safe at work.
Methods: This study applied the Rasmussen model of boundaries to understand the factors that formed the boundaries, the gradients, and countergradients in a biomedical laboratory.
Results: The most central goal was to be the first to publish, and this formed the boundary to scientific output failure; the boundary to unacceptable workload and boundary to functionally acceptable performance were the other 2 boundaries in line with the Rasmussen model. The workers had developed methods (mental risk assessment, teamwork, and experience and familiarity) of working, which ensured they remained productive and safe. This can be described as resilient performance, where resilience is not something that a system has but something it does to adjust their performance when faced with expected or unexpected changes. Discussion and
Conclusion: A customized portfolio of rule-based non negotiable instructions and a risk assessment-based approach would be best suited for a biomedical laboratory. The workers have learned resilient performance on their own and unknowingly are already practicing this. It is now time to formally incorporate such practices into the safety systems of biomedical laboratories. Copyright 2021, ABSA International 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Rasmussen model of boundaries; biosafety; mental risk assessment; mentoring; resilient performance

Year:  2021        PMID: 36032651      PMCID: PMC9135159          DOI: 10.1089/apb.21.919624

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Biosaf        ISSN: 1535-6760


  21 in total

1.  Failure to adapt or adaptations that fail: contrasting models on procedures and safety.

Authors:  Sidney Dekker
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.661

2.  Cost and benefits of implementing an occupational safety and health management system (OSH MS) in enterprises in Poland.

Authors:  Jan Rzepecki
Journal:  Int J Occup Saf Ergon       Date:  2012

3.  Supporting the human life-raft in confronting the juggernaut of technology: Jens Rasmussen, 1961-1986.

Authors:  Vivek Kant
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 3.661

Review 4.  Violations and migrations in health care: a framework for understanding and management.

Authors:  R Amalberti; C Vincent; Y Auroy; G de Saint Maurice
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-12

5.  A new view of safety: Safety 2.

Authors:  D R Ball; C Frerk
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 9.166

Review 6.  Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study.

Authors:  Mojtaba Vaismoradi; Hannele Turunen; Terese Bondas
Journal:  Nurs Health Sci       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 1.857

7.  An airport occupational health and safety management system from the OHSAS 18001 perspective.

Authors:  Dejana Dejanović; Milenko Heleta
Journal:  Int J Occup Saf Ergon       Date:  2016-05-03

8.  The normalization of deviance in healthcare delivery.

Authors:  John Banja
Journal:  Bus Horiz       Date:  2010

9.  Standardization in patient safety: the WHO High 5s project.

Authors:  Agnès Leotsakos; Hao Zheng; Rick Croteau; Jerod M Loeb; Heather Sherman; Carolyn Hoffman; Louise Morganstein; Dennis O'Leary; Charles Bruneau; Peter Lee; Margaret Duguid; Christian Thomeczek; Erica van der Schrieck-De Loos; Bill Munier
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.038

10.  Reviewing the values of a standard operating procedure.

Authors:  Gidey Amare
Journal:  Ethiop J Health Sci       Date:  2012-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.