Dataset Information

Measurement of resilience potential - development of a resilience assessment grid for emergency departments.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Resilience engineering has been advocated as an alternative to the management of safety over the last decade in many domains. However, to facilitate metrics for measuring and helping analyze the resilience potential for emergency departments (EDs) remains a significant challenge. The study aims to redesign the Hollnagel's resilience assessment grid (RAG) into a custom-made RAG (ED-RAG) to support resilience management in EDs. METHODS:The study approach had three parts: 1) translation of Hollnagel's RAG into Chinese version, followed by generation of a tailored set of ED-RAG questions adapted to EDs; 2) testing and revising the tailored sets until to achieve satisfactory validity for application; 3) design of a new rating scale and scoring method. The test criteria of the ED-RAG questionnaire adopted the modified three-level scoring criteria proposed by Bloom and Fischer. The study setting of the field test is a private regional hospital. RESULTS:The fifth version of ED-RAG was acceptable after a field test. It has three sets of open structured questions for the potentials to respond, monitor, and anticipate, and a set of structured questions for the potential to learn. It contained 38 questions corresponding to 32 foci. A new 4-level rating scale along with a novel scaling method can improve the scores conversion validity and communication between team members and across investigations. This final version is set to complete an interview for around 2 hours. CONCLUSIONS:The ED-RAG represents a snapshot of EDs'resilience under specific conditions. It might be performed multiple times by a single hospital to monitor the directions and contents of improvement that can supplement conventional safety management toward resilience. Some considerations are required to be successful when hospitals use it. Future studies to overcome the potential methodological weaknesses of the ED-RAG are needed.

SUBMITTER: Chuang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7505428 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measurement of resilience potential - development of a resilience assessment grid for emergency departments.

Chuang Sheuwen S Ou Ju-Chi JC Hollnagel Erik E Hou Sen-Kuang SK

PloS one 20200921 9

<h4>Background</h4>Resilience engineering has been advocated as an alternative to the management of safety over the last decade in many domains. However, to facilitate metrics for measuring and helping analyze the resilience potential for emergency departments (EDs) remains a significant challenge. The study aims to redesign the Hollnagel's resilience assessment grid (RAG) into a custom-made RAG (ED-RAG) to support resilience management in EDs.<h4>Methods</h4>The study approach had three parts: ...[more]

PMID: 32956391

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Resilience Assessment Grid (RAG) has attracted increasing interest in recent healthcare discourse as an instrument to understand and measure the resilience performance of socio-technical systems. Despite its growing popularity in healthcare, its applicability and utility remain unclear. This scoping review aims to understand the practical application of RAG method and its outcomes in healthcare.MethodWe followed the Arksey and O'Malley, and the Levac and colleagues' framework for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR Checklist. We conducted searches of three electronic databases [Medline, Embase and Web of Science] in May 2021. Supplementary searches included Google Scholar, web and citation searches, and hand searches of the nine seminal edited books on Resilience Engineering and Resilient Health Care. All English language, empirical studies of RAG application in the healthcare setting were included. Open Science Framework [Registration-DOI. 10.17605/OSF.IO/GTCZ3].ResultsTwelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Diversities were found across study designs and methodologies. Qualitative designs and literature reviews were most frequently used to develop the RAG and applied it in practice. Eight of the studies had qualitative designs, three studies had mixed-methods designs and one study had a quantitative design. All studies reported that the RAG was very helpful for understanding how frontline healthcare professionals manage the complexity of everyday work. While the studies gained insights from applying the RAG to analyze organizational resilience and identify areas for improvement, it was unclear how suggestions were implemented and how they contributed to quality improvement.ConclusionThe RAG is a promising tool to manage some of the current and future challenges of the healthcare system. To realise the potential benefits of the RAG, it is important that we move beyond the development phase of the RAG tool and use it to guide implementation and management of quality initiatives.

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus pandemic has had a profound impact on organization and delivery of care. The challenges faced by healthcare organizations in dealing with the pandemic have intensified interest in the concept of resilience. While effort has gone into conceptualising resilience, there has been relatively little work on how to evaluate organizational resilience. This paper reports on an extensive review of approaches to resilience measurement and assessment in empirical healthcare studies, and examines their usefulness for researchers, policymakers and healthcare managers.MethodsVarious databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL (EBSCO host), Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley), CDSR, Science Citation Index, and Social Science Citation Index) were searched from January 2000 to September 2021. We included quantitative, qualitative and modelling studies that focused on measuring or qualitatively assessing organizational resilience in a healthcare context. All studies were screened based on titles, abstracts and full text. For each approach, information on the format of measurement or assessment, method of data collection and analysis, and other relevant information were extracted. We classified the approaches to organizational resilience into five thematic areas of contrast: (1) type of shock; (2) stage of resilience; (3) included characteristics or indicators; (4) nature of output; and (5) purpose. The approaches were summarised narratively within these thematic areas.ResultsThirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. We identified a lack of consensus on how to evaluate organizational resilience in healthcare, what should be measured or assessed and when, and using what resilience characteristic and indicators. The measurement and assessment approaches varied in scope, format, content and purpose. Approaches varied in terms of whether they were prospective (resilience pre-shock) or retrospective (during or post-shock), and the extent to which they addressed a pre-defined and shock-specific set of characteristics and indicators.ConclusionA range of approaches with differing characteristics and indicators has been developed to evaluate organizational resilience in healthcare, and may be of value to researchers, policymakers and healthcare managers. The choice of an approach to use in practice should be determined by the type of shock, the purpose of the evaluation, the intended use of results, and the availability of data and resources.

Dataset Information

Measurement of resilience potential - development of a resilience assessment grid for emergency departments.

Publications

Measurement of resilience potential - development of a resilience assessment grid for emergency departments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets