US Healthcare, despite its exceptional technology and innovative treatments, is still unsafe and unreliable. It is estimated that medical errors account for an estimated 254,000 inpatient deaths a year and hold the distinction as the third leading cause of death in the US. Despite an aggressive national campaign set by organizations like the National Academy of Medicine, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, the National Patient Safety Foundation, and the National Quality Forum, efforts to improve the quality and safety of US Healthcare have been unsuccessful, or at best, unsustainable at eliminating preventable patient harm. Historically, US Healthcare has turned to commercial aviation, nuclear energy, oil and gas, and other high reliability industries for lessons on how to avoid harm. In this paper, we join two pre-existing conceptual models: high reliability organizing and error management theory to propose a strategy for embedding and sustaining a preoccupation with failure and commitment to resilience within healthcare to advance a practical and disciplined focus to advance organizational high reliability.
WeickKSutcliffeK.Managing the unexpected: resilient performance in an age of uncertainty.
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass, 2007.
5.
CroftJ. Reconsidering upset recovery training. Airlines turn to industry for help with extended envelope training. Aviation Week & Space Technology, www.avaitionweek.com (2014, accessed 10 October 2018).
6.
SheetzKHDimickJBGhaferiAA.Impact of hospital characteristics on failure to rescue following major surgery. Ann Surg2016;
263: 692–697.
7.
ChillaregeKNordstromCWilliamsK.Learning from our mistakes: error exposure training for mature learners. J Bus Psycol2003;
17: 369–385.
8.
KeithNFreseM.Effectiveness of error management training: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol2008;
93: 59–69.
9.
Van der BorghtLSchouppeNNotebaertW.Improved memory for error feedback. Psychol Res2016;
80: 1049–1058.
10.
GullySPayneSKolesKet al.
The impact of error training and individual differences on training outcomes: an attribute-treatment interaction perspective. J Appl Psycol2002;
87: 143–155.
11.
SternbachJMWangKEl KhouryRet al.
Measuring error identification and recovery skills in surgical residents. Ann Thorac Surg2017;
103: 663–669.
12.
PeiKMerolaJDavisKAet al.
Can residents detect errors in technique while observing central line insertions?Am J Surg2016;
213: 1166–1170.
13.
FreseMBrodbeckFCHeinbokelTet al.
Errors in training computer skills: on the positive function of errors. Human-Computer Interact1991;
6: 77–93.
14.
SatavaRM.The future of surgical simulation and surgical robotics. Bull Am Coll Surg2007;
92: 13–19.
15.
PruemperJZapfDBrodbeckFCet al.
Errors of novices and experts: some surprising differences between novice and expert errors in computerized office work. Behav Inform Technol1992;
11: 319–328.
16.
CroskerryP.Clinical cognition and diagnostic error: applications of a dual process model of reasoning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract2009;
1: 27–35.
17.
ChiMT.Two approaches to the study of experts’ characteristics. In: KAEricssonNCharnessPJFeltovichet al. (eds) The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance.
New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp.21–30.
18.
DekkerS.Patient safety: a human factors approach.
Boca Raton, FL:
CRC Press, 2011.
BellBSKozlowskiSWJ.Toward a theory of learner-centered training design: an integrative framework of active learning. In: SWJKozlowskiESalas (eds) Learning, training, and development in organizations.
New York, NY:
Taylor & Francis, 2010, pp.263–300.
21.
KeithN.Managing errors during training. In: JBauerCHarteis (eds) Human fallibility: the ambiguity of errors for work and learning.
Dordrecht, Netherlands:
Springer, 2012, pp.173–196.
22.
DrorISchmidtPO'ConnorL.A cognitive perspective on technology enhanced learning in medical training: great opportunities, pitfalls and challenges. Med Teach2011;
33: 291–296.
23.
ProninELinDYRossL.The bias blind spot: perceptions of bias in self versus others. Pers Soc Psychol Bull2002;
28: 369–381.
24.
BirdiKSZapfD.Age differences in reactions to errors in computer-based work. Behav Inf Tech1997;
16: 309–319.
25.
DrorIEStevenageSVAshworthA.Helping the cognitive system learn: exaggerating distinctiveness and uniqueness. Appl Cognit Psychol2008;
22: 573–584.
26.
DrorI. A novel approach to minimize error in the medical domain: Cognitive neuroscientific insights into training. Med Teach. 2011;
33: 34–38.
RosenMASalasESilvestriSet al.
Simulation-based training in emergency medicine: the simulation module for assessment of resident targeted event responses (SMARTER) approach. Simul Healthc2008;
3: 170–179.
29.
GardnerAKAbdelfattahKWierschJet al.
Embracing errors in simulation-based training: the effect of error training on retention and transfer of central venous catheter skills. J Surg Educ2015;
72: 158–162.
GreenbergCCDombrowskiJDimickJB.Video-based surgical coaching an emerging approach to performance improvement.JAMA Surg2016;
151: 282–283.
33.
TrehanABarnett VanesACartyMJet al.
The impact of feedback of intraoperative technical performance in surgery: a systematic review. BMJ Open2015;
5: e006759.
34.
WiegandDM.Exploring the role of emotional intelligence in behavior-based safety coaching. J Safety Res2007;
38: 391–398.
DelaneyMMMajiPKalitaTet al.
Improving adherence to essential birth practices using the WHO safe childbirth checklist with peer coaching: experience from 60 public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. Glob Health Sci Pract2017;
5: 217–231.
40.
SchleyerAMBestJAMcIntyreLKet al.
Improving resident engagement in quality improvement and patient safety initiatives at the bedside: the advocate for clinical education (ACE). Am J Med Qual2013;
28: 243–249.
41.
GawandeA.The checklist manifesto: how to get things right.
New York, NY:
Metropolitan Books, 2010.
42.
ArriagaAFBaderAWongJMet al.
Simulation-based trail of surgical-crisis checklists. N Engl J Med2013;
368: 246–253.
43.
SeonaePJG.Use and limitations of checklists: other strategies for audits and inspections. Qual Assur J2001;
5: 133–136.
44.
PrinetJCMizeACStarterN.Triggering and detecting attentional narrowing in controlled environments. Proc Hum Fact Ergon Soc2016;
60: 298–302.
45.
StieglerMPAugustDA.Cognitive aids: trending, transformative or just too much?ASA Monitor2014;
78: 16–18.
46.
KeeblerJRLazzaraEHPatzerBSet al.
Meta-analyses of the effects of standardized handoff protocols on patient, provider, and organizational outcomes. Hum Factors2016;
58: 1187–1205.
47.
GraberMElyJW.Preventing diagnostic errors in primary care. Am Fam Physician2016;
94: 426–432.
48.
National Patient Safety Foundation (NPSF). RCA2: improving root cause analyses and actions to prevent harm.
Boston, MA:
National Patient Safety Foundation, 2015.
