PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12856557

Preventing medical errors by designing benign failures.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One way to successfully reduce medical errors is to design health care systems that are more resistant to the tendencies of human beings to err. One interdisciplinary approach entails creating design changes, mitigating human errors, and making human error irrelevant to outcomes. This approach is intended to facilitate the creation of benign failures, which have been called mistake-proofing devices and forcing functions elsewhere. USING FAULT TREES TO DESIGN FORCING FUNCTIONS: A fault tree is a graphical tool used to understand the relationships that either directly cause or contribute to the cause of a particular failure. A careful analysis of a fault tree enables the analyst to anticipate how the process will behave after the change. EXAMPLE OF AN APPLICATION: A scenario in which a patient is scalded while bathing can serve as an example of how multiple fault trees can be used to design forcing functions. The first fault tree shows the undesirable event--patient scalded while bathing. The second fault tree has a benign event--no water. Adding a scald valve changes the outcome from the undesirable event ("patient scalded while bathing") to the benign event ("no water") LIMITATIONS: Analysis of fault trees does not ensure or guarantee that changes necessary to eliminate error actually occur. Most mistake-proofing is used to prevent simple errors and to create well-defended processes, but complex errors can also result. CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of mistake-proofing or forcing functions can be thought of as changing the logic of a process. Errors that formerly caused undesirable failures can be converted into the causes of benign failures. The use of fault trees can provide a variety of insights into the design of forcing functions that will improve patient safety.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

John R Grout. 2003. Preventing medical errors by designing benign failures.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1549-3741(03)29043-2

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The causal relationship between multiple cardiovascular diseases and glioblastoma: A Mendelian randomization study.

Observational studies suggest an association between glioblastoma (GBM) and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), but a causal relationship remains unestablished. This study aimed to investigate the causal link between multiple CVDs and GBM risk. The inverse variance weighted method indicated that all 18 CVDs had significant causal associations with GBM (P&#x2005;<&#x2005;.05). Genetically predicted CVDs were uniformly associated with a lower risk of GBM (odds ratio&#x2005;<&#x2005;1), identifying them as potential protective factors. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the absence of significant heterogeneity or horizontal pleiotropy, and the MR-Steiger test validated the correct causal direction. This Mendelian randomization (MR) study provides evidence that a range of CVDs are causally associated with a decreased risk of developing GBM. These findings suggest shared biological pathways and offer new insights for understanding GBM etiology. We conducted a 2-sample MR analysis using publicly available genome-wide association study data. GBM was the outcome, and 18 cardiovascular-related traits (including coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, and venous thromboembolism) were exposures. Instrumental variables were single-nucleotide polymorphisms significantly associated with exposures (P&#x2005;<&#x2005;5&#x2005;&#xd7;&#x2005;10-8). The primary analysis used the inverse variance weighted method, supplemented with MR-Egger, weighted median, and weighted mode methods. Sensitivity analyses, including Cochran Q test, MR-Egger intercept test, leave-one-out analysis, and MR-Steiger directionality test, were performed to ensure robustness.

Causality↗

Analysing and interpreting competing risk data.

When competing risks are present, two types of analysis can be performed: modelling the cause specific hazard and modelling the hazard of the subdistribution. This paper contrasts these two methods and presents the benefits of each. The interpretation is specific to the analysis performed. When modelling the cause specific hazard, one performs the analysis under the assumption that the competing risks do not exist. This could be beneficial when, for example, the main interest is whether the treatment works in general. In modelling the hazard of the subdistribution, one incorporates the competing risks in the analysis. This analysis compares the observed incidence of the event of interest between groups. The latter analysis is specific to the structure of the observed data and it can be generalized only to another population with similar competing risks.

Causality↗

Evaluating candidate agents of selective pressure for cystic fibrosis.

Cystic fibrosis is the most common lethal single-gene mutation in people of European descent, with a carrier frequency upwards of 2%. Based upon molecular research, resistances in the heterozygote to cholera and typhoid fever have been proposed to explain the persistence of the mutation. Using a population genetic model parameterized with historical demographic and epidemiological data, we show that neither cholera nor typhoid fever provided enough historical selective pressure to produce the modern incidence of cystic fibrosis. However, we demonstrate that the European tuberculosis pandemic beginning in the seventeenth century would have provided sufficient historical, geographically appropriate selective pressure under conservative assumptions. Tuberculosis has been underappreciated as a possible selective agent in producing cystic fibrosis but has clinical, molecular and now historical, geographical and epidemiological support. Implications for the future trajectory of cystic fibrosis are discussed. Our result supports the importance of novel investigations into the role of arylsulphatase B deficiency in cystic fibrosis and tuberculosis.

Causality↗