Error Safety
Contents |
Traffic pollution and noise may cause daytime sleepiness, nighttime snoring: study
Causes Of Human Error In The Workplace
MSHA needs to improve consistency in recording and types of human error at workplace addressing complaints, OIG audit saysConstruction safety group aims to raise awareness
Categories Of Human Error At Workplace
of RF radiation exposure FMCSA seeks comment on proposed changes to Safety Measurement System website EPA moves to example of human error fast-track evaluation of five chemicals under updated TSCA Best practices for preventing occupational exposure to anesthesia not always followed, NIOSH saysSAFETY TIPSMoreAnimal safetyDriving safetyFACE reportsHand toolsHeat stressOffice safetySafe liftingWorkplace exposureWorkplace violenceWorkstationsLatest TipsLadder safety 101 Selecting and trying on human error and safety at work protective footwear FACEValue: Worker dies after being pinned by truck axle Welding fume hazardsElevating work platforms Avoid poisonous plants when working outdoors Evacuating from a high-rise office building Indoor air quality issuesWORKPLACE SOLUTIONSMoreArc flashElectricalEyewashes/ShowersFoot protectionHand/Arm ProtectionHeat stressLeading/lagging indictatorsLockout/tagoutLatest Workplace SolutionsNoise-monitoring innovations Fall clearance requirements Facial hair and respirator fit Complying with updated regulations on FR vestsPreventive measures for heat stress – outdoors and indoors Applying risk management tools Understanding blind-flange lockout devices Plants and warehouses: Common safety issuesPRODUCTSMoreEyewashes/showersEye protectionFall protectionFoot protectionHand protectionHead/face protectionHearing protectionInstruments/monitorsLightingProtective clothingRespiratory protectionSafety tools/knivesProduct FocusWomen's PPE- Trends in Women's PPESupplier NewsNew this MonthHigh-visibility jacket and vest Welding shield LED communication system Leather gloveRESOURCES & TOOLSMoreCase Studies/White PapersChecklists/FormsGuida
Me Forgot Password? Login or Sign up for a Free Account My Topics of Interest My CME My Profile Sign Out Home Topics Issues WebM&M Cases Perspectives Primers Submit Case CME / CEU Training Catalog Info Glossary
Industrial Accidents Caused By Human Error
About PSNet Help & FAQ Contact PSNet Email Updates Editorial Team Technical Expert/Advisory Panel how to reduce human error in the workplace Terms & Conditions / Copyright PSNet Privacy Policy External Link Disclaimer Patient Safety Primer Last Updated: March 2015 Systems Approach
Minimizing The Likelihood Of Human Error In The Workplace
Topics Resource Type Patient Safety Primers Approach to Improving Safety Error Reporting More Share Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Print Background A 65-year-old woman presented to the outpatient surgery department of one of http://www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com/articles/13159-safety-leadership-neuroscience-and-human-error-reduction the most respected hospitals in the United States for a relatively routine procedure, a trigger finger release on her left hand. Instead, the surgeon performs a completely different procedure—a carpal tunnel release. How could this happen? Medicine has traditionally treated errors as failings on the part of individual providers, reflecting inadequate knowledge or skill. The systems approach, by contrast, takes the view that most errors reflect predictable human https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primers/primer/21/systems-approach failings in the context of poorly designed systems (e.g., expected lapses in human vigilance in the face of long work hours or predictable mistakes on the part of relatively inexperienced personnel faced with cognitively complex situations). Rather than focusing corrective efforts on punishment or remediation, the systems approach seeks to identify situations or factors likely to give rise to human error, and change the underlying systems of care in order to reduce the occurrence of errors or minimize their impact on patients. The modern field of systems analysis was pioneered by the British psychologist James Reason, whose analysis of industrial accidents led to fundamental insights about the nature of preventable adverse events. Reason's analysis of errors in fields as diverse as aviation and nuclear power revealed that catastrophic safety failures are almost never caused by isolated errors committed by individuals. Instead, most accidents result from multiple, smaller errors in environments with serious underlying system flaws. Reason introduced the Swiss Cheese model to describe this phenomenon. In this model, errors made by individuals result in disastrous consequences due to flawed systems—the holes in the cheese. This model not only has tremendous explanatory power, it also helps point the way toward soluti
guys at safety that it was dangerous and one day we would lose concentration and pay for it. I already told those guys at safety that it was very dangerous! http://www.safetydifferently.com/the-use-and-abuse-of-human-error/ We are human and this can happen to us. This curve is inhuman!" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_error These are the distressed words of the injured train driver moments after the train derailment in Santiago de Compostela, northern Spain on 25 July 2013. The driver can be heard pleading in sorrow, hoping for the safety of the passengers, “I have turned over. My God, my God, the poor passengers. I hope human error no-one is dead. I hope. I hope.” Seventy-nine people died. In the aftermath of the accident, initial investigations ruled out mechanical or technical failure, sabotage and terrorism. That appeared to leave only two possible explanations – ‘human error’ or ‘recklessness’, or both. When society demands someone to blame, the difference – whatever it might be – can seem trivial. What followed was a display of our instinct of human error to find a simple explanation and someone to blame. Soon, the explanation and the blame pointed to the driver. The Galicia regional government president Alberto Nunez Feijoo stated that “The driver has acknowledged his mistake“. Meanwhile, Jorge Fernandez Diaz, Spain’s Interior Minister, said that there “were reasonable grounds to think he may have a potential liability” and confirmed he could face multiple charges for reckless manslaughter. While safety investigations are ongoing, the driver faces preliminary charges of 79 counts of homicide by professional recklessness and numerous counts of bodily harm. Several claims appeared about the driver in the media, often without relevant context. It was reported that the driver “admitted speeding” on the occasion of the crash [1]. It is known that the train was travelling at twice the speed limit on the curve and that just before the crash. The train’s black boxes showed that the train was travelling at 192 kph moments before the crash. The speed limit on the curve was 80 kph. The implication was that the speeding was reckless. The media pounced onto an old Facebook post reportedly by the driver, over a year ago, of the speeds at which his trains would tra
Island accident), aviation (see pilot error), space exploration (e.g., the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster and Space Shuttle Columbia disaster), and medicine (see medical error). Prevention of human error is generally seen as a major contributor to reliability and safety of (complex) systems. Contents 1 Definition 2 Performance 3 Categories 4 Sources 5 Controversies 6 See also 7 References Definition[edit] Human error means that something has been done that was "not intended by the actor; not desired by a set of rules or an external observer; or that led the task or system outside its acceptable limits".[1] In short, it is a deviation from intention, expectation or desirability.[1] Logically, human actions can fail to achieve their goal in two different ways: the actions can go as planned, but the plan can be inadequate (leading to mistakes); or, the plan can be satisfactory, but the performance can be deficient (leading to slips and lapses).[2][3] However, a mere failure is not an error if there had been no plan to accomplish something in particular.[1] Performance[edit] Human error and performance are two sides of the same coin: "human error" mechanisms are the same as "human performance" mechanisms; performance later categorized as 'error' is done so in hindsight:[4][5] therefore actions later termed "human error" are actually part of the ordinary spectrum of human behaviour. The study of absent-mindedness in everyday life provides ample documentation and categorization of such aspects of behavior. While human error is firmly entrenched in the classical approaches to accident investigation and risk assessment, it has no role in newer approaches such as resilience engineering.[6] Categories[edit] There are many ways to categorize human error.[7][8] exogenous versus endogenous (i.e., originating outside versus inside the individual)[9] situation assessment versus response planning[10] and related distinctions in errors in problem detection (also see signal detection theory) errors in problem diagnosis (also see problem solving) errors in action planning and execution[11] (for example: slips or errors of execution versus mistakes or errors of intention[12][13]) By level of analysis; for example, perceptual (e.g., optical illusion