help button home button JAMIA Hate scrolling?
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH

First published February 28, 2007 as JAMIA PrePrint; doi:10.1197/jamia.M2245
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2007;14(3):312-319
© 2007 American Medical Informatics Association


A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
M2245v1
14/3/312    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, T.
Right arrow Articles by Patel, V. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, T.
Right arrow Articles by Patel, V. L.

Submitted on August 9, 2006
Accepted on February 6, 2007

Perceived violations and preemptive interventions on emergency psychiatry rounds

Trevor Cohen MBChB, MPhil1*, Brett Blatter MD2, Carlos Ameida MD2, and Vimla L. Patel PhD, DSc3

Affiliation of the authors: 1 Laboratory of Decision Science and Cognition, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY ; 2 Psychiatric Emergency Department, Columbia University Medical Center, Columbia University, New York, NY ; 3 Laboratory of Decision Science and Cognition, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY; Department of Psychiatry, New York Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.

Objective Contemporary error research suggests that the quest to eradicate error is misguided. Error commission, detection and recovery are an integral part of cognitive work, even at the expert level. In collaborative workspaces, the perception of potential error is directly observable: workers discuss and respond to perceived violations of accepted practice norms. As perceived violations are captured and corrected preemptively, they do not fit Reason's widely accepted definition of error as "failure to achieve an intended outcome". However, perceived violations suggest the aversion of potential error, and consequently have implications for error prevention. This research aims to identify and describe perceived violations of the boundaries of accepted procedure in a psychiatric emergency department (PED), and how they are resolved in practice.

Design Clinical discourse from fourteen PED patient rounds was audio-recorded. Excerpts from recordings suggesting perceived violations or incidents of miscommunication were extracted and analyzed using qualitative coding methods. The results are interpreted in relation to prior research on vulnerabilities to error in the PED.

Results Thirty incidents of perceived violations or miscommunication are identified and analyzed. Of these, only one medication error was formally reported. Other incidents would not have been detected by a retrospective analysis.

Conclusions The analysis of perceived violations expands the data available for error analysis beyond occasional reported adverse events. These data are prospective: responses are captured in real time. This analysis supports a set of recommendations to improve the quality of care in the PED and other critical care contexts.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 1994 by the American Medical Informatics Association.