Process support for risk mitigation: A case study of variability and resilience in vascular surgery

BMJ Quality and Safety

Volumn 20, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 672-679

  Brattheim, Berit ^a   Faxvaag, Arild ^a   Seim, Andreas ^a,b  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b SINTEF TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMORBIDITY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; ENDOVASCULAR ANEURYSM REPAIR; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MALE; NORWAY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PATIENT MONITORING; PATIENT SAFETY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SURGEON; SURGICAL RISK; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEM ANALYSIS;

AORTIC ANEURYSM, ABDOMINAL; HUMANS; INFORMATION SERVICES; NORWAY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; SAFETY MANAGEMENT; SENTINEL SURVEILLANCE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VASCULAR SURGICAL PROCEDURES; WORKFLOW;

EID: 79960706013     PISSN: 20445415     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs.2010.045062     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S, et al. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:742-52. (Pubitemid 46780634)
2. Greenhalgh T, Potts HW, Wong G, et al. Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. Milbank Q 2009;87:729-88.
3. Panzarasa S, Quaglini S, Cavallini A, et al. Computerised guidelines implementation: obtaining feedback for revision of guidelines, clinical data model and data flow. Artif Intell Med 2007;4594:461-6. (Pubitemid 47545233)
4. Stefanelli M. Knowledge and process management in health care organizations. Methods Inf Med 2004;43:525-35. (Pubitemid 40040337)
5. Montgomery DC. Introduction to Statistical Quality Control. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2005.
6. Olatunde AA. On the importance of statistical process control in health care. Res J Med Sci 2009;3:87-90.
7. Peek N, Goud R, Abu-Hanna A. Application of statistical process control methods to monitor guideline adherence: a case study. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2008:581-5.
8. Thor J, Lundberg J, Ask J, et al. Application of statistical process control in healthcare improvement: systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care 2007;16:387-99. (Pubitemid 47612679)
9. Deming WE. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.
10. Pentland BT. Sequential variety in work processes. Organ Sci 2003;14:528-40. (Pubitemid 37291615)
11. Berwick DM. Controlling variation in health care: a consultation from Walter Shewhart. Med Care 1991;29:1212-25.
12. Thompson AG. Variation may be good for your health: the nature of evidence. Int J Qual Health Care 2002;14:1-3. (Pubitemid 34157057)
13. Costella MF, Saurin TA, de Macedo Guimarães LB. A method for assessing health and safety management systems from the resilience engineering perspective. Saf Sci 2009;47:1056-67.
14. Hollnagel E, Woods DD, Leveson N, eds. Resilience Engineering. Concepts and Precepts. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2008.
15. Nemeth CP, Hollnagel E, Dekker S, eds. Preparation and Restoration. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2009.
16. Jeffcott SA, Ibrahim JE, Cameron PA. Resilience in healthcare and clinical handover. Qual Saf Health Care 2009;18:256-60.
17. Hollnagel E. The four cornerstones of resilience engineering. In: Nemeth CP, Hollnagel E, Dekker S, eds. Preparation and Restoration. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2009:117-33.
18. Tan WA, Makaroun MS. Abdominal aortic aneurysm, rupture. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/416397-overview (accessed 4 Feb 2009).
19. Fillinger M. Who should we operate on and how do we decide: predicting rupture and survival in patients with aortic aneurysm. Semin Vasc Surg 2007;20:121-7. (Pubitemid 46908025)
20. Wilt T, Lederle F, Macdonald R, et al. Comparison of endovascular and open surgical repairs for abdominal aortic aneurysm. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 2006;144:1-113.
21. Chambers D, Epstein D, Walker S, et al. Endovascular stents for abdominal aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess 2009;13:1-318.
22. Brattheim B, Seim AR, Faxvaag A. Clinical processes in an innovative vascular surgeon community. Implications for workflow modeling. Stud Health Technol Inform 2008;136:371-6.
23. Sørby ID, Nytrø Ø, Røst TB. Empirical Grounding of Guideline Implementation in Cooperative Clinical Care Situations. Riva del Garda, Italy: AI Techniques in Healthcare: Computerized Guidelines and Protocols, 2006.
24. Kohn LT, Corrigan J, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.
25. Johnson J, Rogers W, Lotz M, et al. Ethical challenges of innovative surgery: a response to the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 2010;376:1113-15.
26. Angelos P. The ethical challenges of surgical innovation for patient care. Lancet 2010;376:1046-7.
27. Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005;293:1223-38. (Pubitemid 40327908)
28. Quaglini S, Stefanelli M, Cavallini A, et al. Guideline-based careflow systems. Artif Intell Med 2000;20:5-22. (Pubitemid 30645572)
29. Persell SD, Dolan NC, Friesema EM, et al. Frequency of inappropriate medical exceptions to quality measures. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:225-31.
30. Nemeth CP, O'Connor M, Cook RI. The infusion device as a source of healthcare resilience. In: Nemeth CP, Hollnagel E, Dekker S, eds. Preparation and Restoration. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2009:235-53.
31. Ashby WR. An Introduction to Cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall, 1956. Internet (1999). http://pcp.vub.ac.be/books/IntroCyb.pdf (accessed 10 Dec 2010).
32. Hollnagel E. Barriers and Accident Prevention. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004.