Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Oct;23(10):398-405.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2023.06.002. Epub 2023 Aug 8.

Human factors in anaesthetic practice part I: facts and fallacies

J Macallan  1 , J Sutcliffe  1 , S Lomax  1
Affiliations
Review

Human factors in anaesthetic practice part I: facts and fallacies

J Macallan et al. BJA Educ. 2023 Oct.
No abstract available

Keywords: ergonomics; human factors and ergonomics; human factors engineering; systems thinking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
SEIPS Framework..
Fig 2
Fig 2
Shorrock's varieties of human work. (right). Path Images (left) courtesy of MedLed Ltd. Top left: path planners lay a path based on where they think people should walk (WAI). However, people tend to take the more efficient route to their destination (WAD). However, if asked, they may not disclose that they took the shortcut across the grass (WADi). Middle left: the planners put up a sign requesting people not to walk on the grass (WAP). This is ignored as there remains an easier and more efficient route to peoples' destination (WAD)∗. The path planners have two options—consider that there is a more effective route and move the path or place a forcing function to protect the grass (bottom left). ∗Many healthcare communications (emails/posters) telling workers to do/not do something in a certain way (WAP) are ineffective, especially if the reasons for WAD are not understood.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Safety-I vs Safety-II.. The ‘Safety-I’ approach involves examining incidents, accidents and when things go wrong. This narrow focus means that we are disregarding what happens the majority of the time. The focus of ‘Safety-II’ is much broader and involves learning from everyday work when safety is present (i.e. looking at when things go right, and when they go wrong). Safety-II is not intended as a replacement for Safety-I, instead they offer complementary perspectives on safety.
Fig 4
Fig 4
Hierarchy of intervention effectiveness.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Catchpole K., Bowie P., Fouquet S., Rivera J., Hignett S. Frontiers in human factors: embedding specialists in multi-disciplinary efforts to improve healthcare. Int J Qual Health Care. 2021;33:13–18. - PMC - PubMed
    1. NHS England Patient safety incident response framework. 2022. https://www.england.nhs.uk/patient-safety/incident-response-framework/ Available from:
    1. Kelly F.E., Frerk C., Bailey C.R., et al. Implementing human factors in anaesthesia: guidance for clinicians, departments and hospitals. Anaesthesia. 2023;78:458–478. - PubMed
    1. Waterson P., Catchpole K. Human factors in healthcare: welcome progress, but still scratching the surface. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:480. - PubMed
    1. Russ A.L., Fairbanks R.J., Karsh B.-T., Militello L.G., Saleem J.J., Wears R.L. The science of human factors: separating fact from fiction. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22:802. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources