IHP 315 Journal One RCA, FMEA, and Culture of Safety PDF

Preview

Summary

In this journal assignment, discuss how would you articulate the major differences between a root cause analysis (RCA) and a Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)? What questions stand out to you regarding the use or effectiveness of either tool? How do you think these tools would help you assess ...

Description

1

Darryl Cooke IHP 315:1-2 Journal RCA, FMEA, and Culture of Safety Professor Joshua Pearson September 5, 2021

2

Differences between RCA and FMEA. Root Cause Analysis and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis are two analyses designed to improve patient safety that deliver solutions for any mistakes that may or can take place in a healthcare setting. Even although each analysis provides comparable end goals of finding the source and understanding how to resolve the problem, they are both unique and utilized in different manners. Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is a procedure to examining problems or issues that can contribute to adverse events or conditions and administer the appropriate resolutions for reacting to them (Sherwin, 2011). For example, a fatigued nurse erroneously administered insulin instead of an antinausea medication to a patient that results in a hypoglycemic coma. A multidisciplinary team should begin a review that starts with data compilation and reconstruction of the event in question through record review and participant interviews (Sherwin, 2011). The main goal is to understand the root cause of the event and provide effective methods to ensure that patient safety is prevented in the future. Another method to prevent harm to patients is the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). Like Root Cause Analysis, FMEA is a more practical approach to patient safety. The Failure Mode and Effects Analysis looks to examine the possible failures and to prevent them by correcting the processes that are extremely in need of change before these failures happened (Liu, et.al., 2020). The importance on prevention may decrease the threat of harm to both patients and staff. FMEA is extremely valuable in evaluating new procedures before implementing them and in weighing the effect to a current process.

3

Questions of usefulness or effectiveness. Here are a few questions that I have regarding the RCA and FMEA usefulness and effectiveness. 1) Did the implantation of RCA and FMEA tools help eliminate the error(s) that had previously occurred? 2) Is there any data available that highlights if the new procedures put in place reduced the chances of serious mishaps/events from occurring? Anticipate use of tools. These tools might be useful to an organization by preventing undo injury to patients and unnecessary errors for staff. Not only will help save lives and countless injuries but avoid numerous lawsuits (Shaqdan, et. al., 2014)). Utilizing RCA tools can be used to understanding the root cause of an event while FMEA tools are useful to prevent future harmful events from happening (Patient Safety Network, 2019). Since both tools can be used in prevention, it will be wise for any organization to build trust, teamwork, identify needed changes, and avoid assigning blame to assure patient safety.

4

Reference Liu, H., Zhang, L., Ping, Y., & Wang, L. (2020). Failure mode and effects analysis for proactive healthcare risk evaluation: A systematic literature review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 26(4), 1320–1337. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13317. Patient Safety Network. (2019 September 7). Root Cause Analysis. Retrieved from https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primer/root-cause-analysis. Shaqdan K, Aran S, Daftari Besheli L, Abujudeh H. Root-cause analysis and health failure mode and effect analysis: two leading techniques in health care quality assessment. J Am Coll Radiol. (2014 Feb. 4). Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24507549/. Sherwin, J. (2011). Contemporary Topics in Health Care: Root Cause Analysis. PT in Motion, 3(4), 26–31....