MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288536055 · doi:10.29173/cjen157

Identifying and managing latent safety threats though a zone-wide emergency department in-situ multidiscipline simulation program: A quality improvement project

2022· article· en· W4288536055 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Domhnall O Dochartaigh, Lisa Ying, Kristen Simard, Christina Eichorst, Alyshah Kaba, Lorissa Mews, Melissa Chan, Taryn Brown, Allison Kirkham, Warren Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Nursing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of CalgaryAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Quality managementIn situProcess managementEmergency departmentComputer scienceOperations managementEngineeringMedicineGeographyNursingManagement system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Latent safety threats (LSTs) have been defined as system based issues that threaten patient safety that can materialize at any time and were previously unrecognized by healthcare providers, unit directors, or hospital administration. While LSTs such as system deficiencies, equipment failures, training, or conditions predisposing medical errors are frequently reported in the literature, a paucity was noted in the management and mitigation of these threats. The purpose of the translational simulation quality improvement project study was to utilize translational simulations to identify, manage, and mitigate future latent safety threats in our EDs. METHODS In 2017, 18 in-situ inter-professional simulation sessions were conducted at 11 EDs. Following each session, a survey assessment tool, created by the research team, was completed by participants to identify latent safety threats. Findings were shared with site clinical nurse educators and managers to help facilitate institutional follow up. For reporting, latent safety threats were categorized thematically and coded as either (i) resolved, (ii) ongoing, or (iii) not managed. Follow-up with sites was completed 1 year following the simulation. RESULTS A total n=158 LSTs were identified. The number and percentage by theme was: staff 48 (30.4%), equipment 41 (25.9%), medications 33 (20.9%), resuscitation resources 24 (15.2%), and information technology (IT) issues 12 (7.6%).Site follow-up identified that 149 LSTs were resolved and ten required ongoing work to manage. No occurrences of a LST ‘not managed’ were identified. CONCLUSIONS Translation simulation effectively identified latent safety threats and assisted interdisciplinary teams in the creation of a structured plan and systematic follow-up to enhance the health system and patient care. Through use of a threat mitigation strategy all identified threats were addressed while some require ongoing management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.158
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Emergency NursingSame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207