Cargando…
Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis
The aim of the study was to perform a risk management procedure in “Magnetic Resonance Examination” process in order to identify the critical phases and sources of radiological errors and to identify potential improvement projects including procedures, tests, and checks to reduce the error occurrenc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3792532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24171173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/763186 |
_version_ | 1782286858181410816 |
---|---|
author | Petrillo, Antonella Fusco, Roberta Granata, Vincenza Filice, Salvatore Raiano, Nicola Amato, Daniela Maria Zirpoli, Maria di Finizio, Alessandro Sansone, Mario Russo, Anna Covelli, Eugenio Maria Pedicini, Tonino Triassi, Maria |
author_facet | Petrillo, Antonella Fusco, Roberta Granata, Vincenza Filice, Salvatore Raiano, Nicola Amato, Daniela Maria Zirpoli, Maria di Finizio, Alessandro Sansone, Mario Russo, Anna Covelli, Eugenio Maria Pedicini, Tonino Triassi, Maria |
author_sort | Petrillo, Antonella |
collection | PubMed |
description | The aim of the study was to perform a risk management procedure in “Magnetic Resonance Examination” process in order to identify the critical phases and sources of radiological errors and to identify potential improvement projects including procedures, tests, and checks to reduce the error occurrence risk. In this study we used the proactive analysis “Failure Mode Effects Criticality Analysis,” a qualitative and quantitative risk management procedure; has calculated Priority Risk Index (PRI) for each activity of the process; have identified, on the PRI basis, the most critical activities and, for them, have defined improvement projects; and have recalculated the PRI after implementation of improvement projects for each activity. Time stop and audits are performed in order to control the new procedures. The results showed that the most critical tasks of “Magnetic Resonance Examination” process were the reception of the patient, the patient schedule drafting, the closing examination, and the organization of activities. Four improvement projects have been defined and executed. PRI evaluation after improvement projects implementation has shown that the risk decreased significantly following the implementation of procedures and controls defined in improvement projects, resulting in a reduction of the PRI between 43% and 100%. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3792532 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37925322013-10-29 Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Petrillo, Antonella Fusco, Roberta Granata, Vincenza Filice, Salvatore Raiano, Nicola Amato, Daniela Maria Zirpoli, Maria di Finizio, Alessandro Sansone, Mario Russo, Anna Covelli, Eugenio Maria Pedicini, Tonino Triassi, Maria Biomed Res Int Research Article The aim of the study was to perform a risk management procedure in “Magnetic Resonance Examination” process in order to identify the critical phases and sources of radiological errors and to identify potential improvement projects including procedures, tests, and checks to reduce the error occurrence risk. In this study we used the proactive analysis “Failure Mode Effects Criticality Analysis,” a qualitative and quantitative risk management procedure; has calculated Priority Risk Index (PRI) for each activity of the process; have identified, on the PRI basis, the most critical activities and, for them, have defined improvement projects; and have recalculated the PRI after implementation of improvement projects for each activity. Time stop and audits are performed in order to control the new procedures. The results showed that the most critical tasks of “Magnetic Resonance Examination” process were the reception of the patient, the patient schedule drafting, the closing examination, and the organization of activities. Four improvement projects have been defined and executed. PRI evaluation after improvement projects implementation has shown that the risk decreased significantly following the implementation of procedures and controls defined in improvement projects, resulting in a reduction of the PRI between 43% and 100%. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013 2013-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3792532/ /pubmed/24171173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/763186 Text en Copyright © 2013 Antonella Petrillo et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Petrillo, Antonella Fusco, Roberta Granata, Vincenza Filice, Salvatore Raiano, Nicola Amato, Daniela Maria Zirpoli, Maria di Finizio, Alessandro Sansone, Mario Russo, Anna Covelli, Eugenio Maria Pedicini, Tonino Triassi, Maria Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis |
title | Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis |
title_full | Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis |
title_fullStr | Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis |
title_short | Risk Management in Magnetic Resonance: Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis |
title_sort | risk management in magnetic resonance: failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3792532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24171173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/763186 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT petrilloantonella riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT fuscoroberta riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT granatavincenza riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT filicesalvatore riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT raianonicola riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT amatodanielamaria riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT zirpolimaria riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT difinizioalessandro riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT sansonemario riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT russoanna riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT covellieugeniomaria riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT pedicinitonino riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis AT triassimaria riskmanagementinmagneticresonancefailuremodeeffectsandcriticalityanalysis |