Generic analysis method to learn from serious adverse events in Dutch hospitals: a human factors perspective

被引:2
|
作者
Baartmans, Mees Casper [1 ]
Van Schoten, Steffie Marijke [2 ]
Wagner, Cordula [3 ]
机构
[1] Netherlands Inst Hlth Serv Res Nivel, Dept Org & Qual Care, Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Amsterdam UMC Locate VUmc, Dept Publ & Occupat Hlth, Amsterdam, Noord Holland, Netherlands
[3] Netherlands Inst Hlth Serv Res Nivel, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
human factors; adverse events; epidemiology and detection; safety management; root cause analysis; patient safety; ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS; QUALITY-OF-CARE; PATIENT SAFETY; HEALTH-CARE; ERGONOMICS; ERRORS; DESIGN; WORK;
D O I
10.1136/bmjoq-2021-001637
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Hospitals in various countries such as the Netherlands investigate and analyse serious adverse events (SAEs) to learn from previous events and attempt to prevent recurrence. However, current methods for SAE analysis do not address the complexity of healthcare and investigations typically focus on single events on the hospital level. This hampers hospitals in their ambition to learn from SAEs. Integrating human factors thinking and using a holistic and more consistent method could improve learning from SAEs. Aim This study aims to develop a novel generic analysis method (GAM) to: (1) facilitate a holistic event analysis using a human factors perspective and (2) ease aggregate analysis of events across hospitals. Methods Multiple steps of carefully evaluating, testing and continuously refining prototypes of the method were performed. Various Dutch stakeholders in the field of patient safety were involved in each step. Theoretical experts were consulted, and the prototype was pretested using information-rich SAE reports from Dutch hospitals. Expert panels, engaging quality and safety experts and medical specialists from various hospitals were consulted for face and content validity evaluation. User test sessions concluded the development of the method. Results The final version of the GAM consists of a framework and affiliated questionnaire. GAM combines elements of three methods for SAE analysis currently practised by Dutch hospitals. It is structured according to the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model, which incorporates a human factors perspective into the analysis. These eases aggregated analysis of SAEs across hospitals and helps to consider the complexity of healthcare work systems. Conclusion The GAM is a valuable new tool for hospitals to learn from SAEs. The method can facilitate a holistic aggregate analysis of SAEs across hospitals using a human factors perspective, and is now ready for further extensive testing.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Deaths from adverse events are halved in Dutch hospitals
    Sheldon, Tony
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 347
  • [2] Common contributing factors of diagnostic error: A retrospective analysis of 109 serious adverse event reports from Dutch hospitals
    Hooftman, Jacky
    Dijkstra, Aart Cornelis
    Suurmeijer, Ilse
    van der Bij, Akke
    Paap, Ellen
    Zwaan, Laura
    [J]. BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2023,
  • [3] Serious Games when used to Learn Software Processes: An Analysis from a Pedagogical Perspective
    Jimenez-Hernandez, Erendira M.
    Oktaba, Hanna
    Piattini, Mario
    Diaz-Barriga, Frida
    [J]. 2017 5TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND INNOVATION (CONISOFT 2017), 2017, : 194 - 203
  • [4] Analysis of Method To Capture Adverse Events in Neonates and Children in Tertiary Care Pediatric Hospitals
    McMahon, Ann W.
    Weinel, Pamela
    Wharton, Gerold T.
    Abrams, Barbara
    Damilano, Cecilia P.
    DeLeon, Diva
    Phuong Lieu
    Yen, Lilly
    Taketomo, Carol K.
    Thornton, Paul S.
    Sood, Beena
    Doe, Edwin
    Baker, Robin L.
    Rodriguez, William
    Murphy, M. Dianne
    [J]. PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2013, 22 : 342 - 343
  • [5] Applying human factors methods to the investigation and analysis of clinical adverse events
    Taylor-Adams, S
    Vincent, C
    Stanhope, N
    [J]. SAFETY SCIENCE, 1999, 31 (02) : 143 - 159
  • [6] The investigation of human error analysis in adverse drug events in Taiwan-From the perspective of causality assessment
    Hsieh, Min-Chih
    Chiang, Po-Yi
    Wang, Eric Min-Yang
    Kung, Wen-Chuan
    Hu, Ya-Tzu
    Huang, Ming-Shi
    Hsieh, Huei-Chi
    [J]. HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS IN MANUFACTURING & SERVICE INDUSTRIES, 2019, 29 (04) : 340 - 349
  • [7] SERIOUS ADVERSE EVENTS (SAE) AND SERIOUS ADVERSE REACTIONS (SAR) REPORTING IN GERMANY FROM 2016-2020: ANALYSIS OF DONOR-TRANSMITTED MALIGNANCY
    Boehler, Klaus
    Barreiros, Ana Paula
    Rahmel, Axel
    [J]. TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 34 : 164 - 165
  • [8] What Can We Learn From In-Depth Analysis of Human Errors Resulting in Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: An Analysis of Serious Adverse Event Reports
    Baartmans, Mees C. C.
    Hooftman, Jacky
    Zwaan, Laura
    van Schoten, Steffie M. M.
    Erwich, Jan Jaap H. M.
    Wagner, Cordula
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PATIENT SAFETY, 2022, 18 (08) : E1135 - E1141
  • [9] Dalfampridine Associated Serious Adverse Events: An Analysis of Data from the Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System
    Ahmed, Nehad J.
    Alahmari, Abdullah K.
    Alshehri, Ahmed M.
    Almalki, Ziyad S.
    [J]. LATIN AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACY, 2022, 41 (06): : 1195 - 1199
  • [10] Factors associated with hospital closure and merger: A survival analysis of Dutch hospitals from 1978 to 2010
    den Hartog, Martin
    Janssen, Richard
    Haselbekke, Bart Jeroen
    Croes, Ramsis
    Klik, Mark
    [J]. HEALTH SERVICES MANAGEMENT RESEARCH, 2013, 26 (01) : 1 - 8