Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work

Robert L. Wears, Sheu-Wen Chuang

研究成果: 書貢獻/報告類型章節

2 引文 (Scopus)

摘要

In health care, guidelines and procedures are central parts of everyday clinical work (ECW). Health care staff are expected to comply and keep up to date with numerous policies and procedures covering their daily work. However, because changes inevitably occur, employees may for various reasons break, bend, modify, work around or inconsistently implement these rules. This process of compromise, mediating between work-asimagined and work-as-done, leads to innumerable small-scale ‘anomalies’ that differentiate everyday from prescribed work; these ‘anomalies’ are sometimes implicated, rightly or wrongly, in adverse events, especially when a Safety-I perspective is taken. This approach (for example, Root Cause Analysis, orthodox quality measurement and improvement) focuses on what went wrong and looks for root causes to undesirable events or unsatisfactory situations. It often leads to amending procedures (typically, adding more constraints to them) to prohibit actions that contributed to creating hazardous situations in these analyses (Reason et al., 1995). This is fundamentally a single feedback learning loop; a form of instrumental learning in which an organisation seeks to improve already existing strategies and processes through ‘patching’ (Argyris and Schön, 1996). But as a result, progress on patient safety has been slow and painful.
原文英語
主出版物標題Resilient Health Care
編輯Robert L Wears, Erik Hollnagel, Jeffrey Braithwaite
發行者Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
頁面225-234
頁數10
2
ISBN(列印)978-1-4724-3782-2
DOIs
出版狀態已發佈 - 2015

指紋

resilience
health care
cause
event
learning
compromise
employee
staff

引用此文

Wears, R. L., & Chuang, S-W. (2015). Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work. 於 R. L. Wears, E. Hollnagel, & J. Braithwaite (編輯), Resilient Health Care (卷 2, 頁 225-234). Ashgate Publishing Ltd.. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315605739

Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work. / Wears, Robert L.; Chuang, Sheu-Wen.

Resilient Health Care. 編輯 / Robert L Wears; Erik Hollnagel; Jeffrey Braithwaite. 卷 2 Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2015. p. 225-234.

研究成果: 書貢獻/報告類型章節

Wears, RL & Chuang, S-W 2015, Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work. 於 RL Wears, E Hollnagel & J Braithwaite (編輯), Resilient Health Care. 卷 2, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 頁 225-234. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315605739
Wears RL, Chuang S-W. Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work. 於 Wears RL, Hollnagel E, Braithwaite J, 編輯, Resilient Health Care. 卷 2. Ashgate Publishing Ltd. 2015. p. 225-234 https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315605739
Wears, Robert L. ; Chuang, Sheu-Wen. / Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work. Resilient Health Care. 編輯 / Robert L Wears ; Erik Hollnagel ; Jeffrey Braithwaite. 卷 2 Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2015. 頁 225-234
@inbook{7605b312b292406d94bd35fa35f62be1,
title = "Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work",
abstract = "In health care, guidelines and procedures are central parts of everyday clinical work (ECW). Health care staff are expected to comply and keep up to date with numerous policies and procedures covering their daily work. However, because changes inevitably occur, employees may for various reasons break, bend, modify, work around or inconsistently implement these rules. This process of compromise, mediating between work-asimagined and work-as-done, leads to innumerable small-scale ‘anomalies’ that differentiate everyday from prescribed work; these ‘anomalies’ are sometimes implicated, rightly or wrongly, in adverse events, especially when a Safety-I perspective is taken. This approach (for example, Root Cause Analysis, orthodox quality measurement and improvement) focuses on what went wrong and looks for root causes to undesirable events or unsatisfactory situations. It often leads to amending procedures (typically, adding more constraints to them) to prohibit actions that contributed to creating hazardous situations in these analyses (Reason et al., 1995). This is fundamentally a single feedback learning loop; a form of instrumental learning in which an organisation seeks to improve already existing strategies and processes through ‘patching’ (Argyris and Sch{\"o}n, 1996). But as a result, progress on patient safety has been slow and painful.",
author = "Wears, {Robert L.} and Sheu-Wen Chuang",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1201/9781315605739",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-1-4724-3782-2",
volume = "2",
pages = "225--234",
editor = "Wears, {Robert L} and Erik Hollnagel and Jeffrey Braithwaite",
booktitle = "Resilient Health Care",
publisher = "Ashgate Publishing Ltd.",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Strategies to Get Resilience into Everyday Clinical Work

AU - Wears, Robert L.

AU - Chuang, Sheu-Wen

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - In health care, guidelines and procedures are central parts of everyday clinical work (ECW). Health care staff are expected to comply and keep up to date with numerous policies and procedures covering their daily work. However, because changes inevitably occur, employees may for various reasons break, bend, modify, work around or inconsistently implement these rules. This process of compromise, mediating between work-asimagined and work-as-done, leads to innumerable small-scale ‘anomalies’ that differentiate everyday from prescribed work; these ‘anomalies’ are sometimes implicated, rightly or wrongly, in adverse events, especially when a Safety-I perspective is taken. This approach (for example, Root Cause Analysis, orthodox quality measurement and improvement) focuses on what went wrong and looks for root causes to undesirable events or unsatisfactory situations. It often leads to amending procedures (typically, adding more constraints to them) to prohibit actions that contributed to creating hazardous situations in these analyses (Reason et al., 1995). This is fundamentally a single feedback learning loop; a form of instrumental learning in which an organisation seeks to improve already existing strategies and processes through ‘patching’ (Argyris and Schön, 1996). But as a result, progress on patient safety has been slow and painful.

AB - In health care, guidelines and procedures are central parts of everyday clinical work (ECW). Health care staff are expected to comply and keep up to date with numerous policies and procedures covering their daily work. However, because changes inevitably occur, employees may for various reasons break, bend, modify, work around or inconsistently implement these rules. This process of compromise, mediating between work-asimagined and work-as-done, leads to innumerable small-scale ‘anomalies’ that differentiate everyday from prescribed work; these ‘anomalies’ are sometimes implicated, rightly or wrongly, in adverse events, especially when a Safety-I perspective is taken. This approach (for example, Root Cause Analysis, orthodox quality measurement and improvement) focuses on what went wrong and looks for root causes to undesirable events or unsatisfactory situations. It often leads to amending procedures (typically, adding more constraints to them) to prohibit actions that contributed to creating hazardous situations in these analyses (Reason et al., 1995). This is fundamentally a single feedback learning loop; a form of instrumental learning in which an organisation seeks to improve already existing strategies and processes through ‘patching’ (Argyris and Schön, 1996). But as a result, progress on patient safety has been slow and painful.

UR - https://www.routledge.com/products/isbn/9781472437822

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054747541&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054747541&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1201/9781315605739

DO - 10.1201/9781315605739

M3 - Chapter

SN - 978-1-4724-3782-2

VL - 2

SP - 225

EP - 234

BT - Resilient Health Care

A2 - Wears, Robert L

A2 - Hollnagel, Erik

A2 - Braithwaite, Jeffrey

PB - Ashgate Publishing Ltd.

ER -