作者: Paul Bowie , Lindsey Pope , Murray Lough
DOI: 10.1111/J.1365-2753.2007.00908.X
关键词:
摘要: Objective To review the literature on perceived benefits and disadvantages associated with significant event analysis (SEA) identify reported barriers facilitating factors. Method A comprehensive search of electronic databases peer reviewed journals was conducted during June 2006. Studies which explored or measured perceptions attitudes in relation to SEA assessed its impact health care quality were included. Results 27 studies identified most undertaken UK general practice. Perceived include: improved communication, enhanced team-working awareness others' contributions. has a strong emotional resonance may lead greater commitment change. Multiple but unverifiable changes practice improvements service through participation. Disadvantages include concerns about litigation, reprisal, embarrassment confidentiality. The reliability is questioned because it lacks robust, standard structured method. Evidence severely limited. Barriers lack training, poor team dynamics, failings facilitation leadership, selective topic choice demands. Facilitating factors effective meetings; protected meeting time; methodical approach; dynamics leadership. Conclusion chasm exists between high expectations for evidence impact. have some merit as team-based educational tool. However, not be reliable technique investigating serious complex safety issues Policy makers need more explicit actual purpose SEA.