Exploring the “Black Box” of Recommendation Generation in Local Health Care Incident Investigations: A Scoping Review

Author:

Lea William,Lawton Rebecca1,Vincent Charles2,O’Hara Jane

Affiliation:

1. Psychology of Healthcare, and NIHR Yorkshire and Humber Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, University of Leeds, Leeds

2. Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford

Abstract

Background Incident investigation remains a cornerstone of patient safety management and improvement, with recommendations meant to drive action and improvement. There is little empirical evidence about how—in real-world hospital settings—recommendations are generated or judged for effectiveness. Objectives Our research questions, concerning internal hospital investigations, were as follows: (1) What approaches to incident investigation are used before the generation of recommendations? (2) What are the processes for generating recommendations after a patient safety incident investigation? (3) What are the number and types of recommendations proposed? (4) What criteria are used, by hospitals or study authors, to assess the quality or strength of recommendations made? Methods Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we conducted a scoping review. Studies were included if they reported data from investigations undertaken and recommendations generated within hospitals. Review questions were answered with content analysis, and extracted recommendations were categorized and counted. Results Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Root cause analysis was the dominant investigation approach, but methods for recommendation generation were unclear. A total of 4579 recommendations were extracted, largely focusing on individuals’ behavior rather than addressing deficiencies in systems (<7% classified as strong). Included studies reported recommendation effectiveness as judged against predefined “action” hierarchies or by incident recurrence, which was not comprehensively reported. Conclusions Despite the ubiquity of incident investigation, there is a surprising lack of evidence concerning how recommendation generation is or should be undertaken. Little evidence is presented to show that investigations or recommendations result in improved care quality or safety. We contend that, although incident investigations remain foundational to patient safety, more enquiry is needed about how this important work is actually achieved and whether it can contribute to improving quality of care.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Leadership and Management

Reference61 articles.

1. The problem with incident reporting;BMJ Qual Saf,2016

2. Human error: models and management;BMJ,2000

3. The investigation and analysis of critical incidents and adverse events in healthcare;Health Technol Assess,2005

4. The problem with root cause analysis;BMJ Qual Saf,2017

5. Successful risk assessment may not always lead to successful risk control: a systematic literature review of risk control after root cause analysis;J Healthc Risk Manag,2012

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3