↓ Skip to main content

Implementing resilience engineering for healthcare quality improvement using the CARE model: a feasibility study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 1,245)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
39 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
89 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Implementing resilience engineering for healthcare quality improvement using the CARE model: a feasibility study protocol
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40814-016-0103-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. E. Anderson, A. J. Ross, J. Back, M. Duncan, P. Snell, K. Walsh, P. Jaye

Abstract

Resilience engineering (RE) is an emerging perspective on safety in complex adaptive systems that emphasises how outcomes emerge from the complexity of the clinical environment. Complexity creates the need for flexible adaptation to achieve outcomes. RE focuses on understanding the nature of adaptations, learning from success and increasing adaptive capacity. Although the philosophy is clear, progress in applying the ideas to quality improvement has been slow. The aim of this study is to test the feasibility of translating RE concepts into practical methods to improve quality by designing, implementing and evaluating interventions based on RE theory. The CARE model operationalises the key concepts and their relationships to guide the empirical investigation. The settings are the Emergency Department and the Older Person's Unit in a large London teaching hospital. Phases 1 and 2 of our work, leading to the development of interventions to improve the quality of care, are described in this paper. Ethical approval has been granted for these phases. Phase 1 will use ethnographic methods, including observation of work practices and interviews with staff, to understand adaptations and outcomes. The findings will be used to collaboratively design, with clinical staff in interactive design workshops, interventions to improve the quality of care. The evaluation phase will be designed and submitted for ethical approval when the outcomes of phases 1 and 2 are known. Study outcomes will be knowledge about the feasibility of applying RE to improve quality, the development of RE theory and a validated model of resilience in clinical work which can be used to guide other applications. Tools, methods and practical guidance for practitioners will also be produced, as well as specific knowledge of the potential effectiveness of the implemented interventions in emergency and older people's care. Further studies to test the application of RE at a larger scale will be required, including studies of other healthcare settings, organisational contexts and different interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 165 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 20%
Student > Master 19 12%
Researcher 14 8%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 43 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 22 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 13%
Engineering 21 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 11%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 49 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,161,925
of 25,701,027 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#30
of 1,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,914
of 327,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,701,027 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.