Practices for Noticing and Dealing with the Critical. A Case Study from Maintenance of Power Plants

Lay, Elizabeth

doi:10.1201/9781317065265-7

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hollnagel (2006) made a valuable contribution by defining the four capabilities of resilient systems: anticipate, monitor, respond and learn [9]. Other researchers have proposed other resilience capabilities, such as rebound from unexpected events and return to equilibrium, robustness [19], planning, adapting, and noticing [20]. Berg and Aase (2019) conceptualised resilience in healthcare based on four categories: anticipation, sense making, trade-offs and adaptations, and defined it as a set of cognitive and behavioural strategies enacted by individuals within an organisational context [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilient Health Care: a systematic review of conceptualisations, study methods and factors that develop resilience

Iflaifel

Lim

Ryan

et al. 2020

BMC Health Serv Res

122

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Traditional approaches to safety management in health care have focused primarily on counting errors and understanding how things go wrong. Resilient Health Care (RHC) provides an alternative complementary perspective of learning from incidents and understanding how, most of the time, work is safe. The aim of this review was to identify how RHC is conceptualised, described and interpreted in the published literature, to describe the methods used to study RHC, and to identify factors that develop RHC. Methods: Electronic searches of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases were performed to identify relevant peer-reviewed studies, and a hand search undertaken for studies published in books that explained how RHC as a concept has been interpreted, what methods have been used to study it, and what factors have been important to its development. Studies were evaluated independently by two researchers. Data was synthesised using a thematic approach. Results: Thirty-six studies were included; they shared similar descriptions of RHC which was the ability to adjust its functioning prior to, during, or following events and thereby sustain required operations under both expected and unexpected conditions. Qualitative methods were mainly used to study RHC. Two types of data sources have been used: direct (e.g. focus groups and surveys) and indirect (e.g. observations and simulations) data sources. Most of the tools for studying RHC were developed based on predefined resilient constructs and have been categorised into three categories: performance variability and Work As Done, cornerstone capabilities for resilience, and integration with other safety management paradigms. Tools for studying RHC currently exist but have yet to be fully implemented. Effective team relationships, trade-offs and health care 'resilience' training of health care professionals were factors used to develop RHC. Conclusions: Although there was consistency in the conceptualisation of RHC, methods used to study and the factors used to develop it, several questions remain to be answered before a gold standard strategy for studying RHC can confidently be identified. These include operationalising RHC assessment methods in multi-level and diverse settings and developing, testing and evaluating interventions to address the wider safety implications of RHC amidst organisational and institutional change.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilient Health Care: a systematic review of conceptualisations, study methods and factors that develop resilience

Iflaifel

Lim

Ryan

et al. 2020

BMC Health Serv Res

122

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2. Practices for noticing and dealing with the critical-a case study from the maintenance of power plants (Lay, 2011) In high-risk, high-pressure complex work such as the maintenance of power plants, quality and safety incidents can happen and sometimes be extremely costly for both the service provider and the customer. Thus, consistent high-quality job performance with few incidents can be the most important differentiating factor when selecting a service provider.…”

Section: Dealing With the Critical: Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reviews of resilience theories and mathematical generalization

Shi

Watanabe

Ogawa³

et al. 2018

Structural Resilience in Sewer Reconstruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilient Health Care: a systematic review of conceptualisations, study methods and factors that develop resilience.

Iflaifel

Lim

Ryan

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Traditional approaches to safety management in health care have focused primarily on counting errors and understanding how things go wrong. Resilient Health Care (RHC) provides an alternative complementary perspective of learning from incidents and understanding how, most of the time, work is safe. The aim of this review was to identify how RHC is conceptualised, described and interpreted in the published literature, to describe the methods used to study RHC, and to identify factors that develop RHC. Methods Electronic searches of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases were performed to identify relevant peer-reviewed studies, and a hand search undertaken for studies published in books that explained how RHC as a concept has been interpreted, what methods have been used to study it, and what factors have been important to its development. Studies were evaluated independently by two researchers. Data was synthesised using a thematic approach. Results Thirty-six studies were included; they shared similar descriptions of RHC which was the ability to adjust its functioning prior to, during, or following events and thereby sustain required operations under both expected and unexpected conditions. Qualitative methods were mainly used to study RHC. Two types of data sources have been used: direct (e.g. focus groups and surveys) and indirect (e.g. observations and simulations) data sources. Most of the tools for studying RHC were developed based on predefined resilient constructs and have been categorised into three categories: performance variability and Work As Done, cornerstone capabilities for resilience, and integration with other safety management paradigms. Tools for studying RHC currently exist but have yet to be fully implemented. Effective team relationships, trade-offs and health care ‘resilience’ training of health care professionals were factors used to develop RHC. Conclusions Although there was consistency in the conceptualisation of RHC, methods used to study and the factors used to develop it, several questions remain to be answered before a gold standard strategy for studying RHC can confidently be identified. These include operationalising RHC assessment methods in multi-level and diverse settings and developing, testing and evaluating interventions to address the wider safety implications of RHC amidst organisational and institutional change.

show abstract

Practices for Noticing and Dealing with the Critical. A Case Study from Maintenance of Power Plants

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Resilient Health Care: a systematic review of conceptualisations, study methods and factors that develop resilience

Resilient Health Care: a systematic review of conceptualisations, study methods and factors that develop resilience

Reviews of resilience theories and mathematical generalization

Resilient Health Care: a systematic review of conceptualisations, study methods and factors that develop resilience.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About