Scripties UMCG - Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
English | Nederlands

Evaluating the effectiveness of two Health Failure Mode and Effect Analysis methods

(2015) Admiraal, Michiel

Purpose: The Health Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA) is a commonly used method in healthcare to conduct a prospective risk analysis. Limitations of the HFMEA led to the development of several modified versions, including the One Hour PRA which diminishes these limitations using interviews and one team meeting instead of several multidisciplinary team meetings. This study evaluates the effectiveness of the HFMEA and the One Hour PRA methods and provides managerial implications to improve risk management in healthcare. Its contribution to theory is the evaluation of the effectiveness of differences between team meetings and interviews in risk analysis.
Method: Interviews with coordinators of both risks analysis methods were conducted and two questionnaires were distributed among the coordinators and participants of both risks analysis methods. One questionnaire entailed the evaluation of the output of both methods, the improvements, and was administrated to the coordinators. The other questionnaire evaluated the perception of the participants of both methods. All were conducted at the University Medical Center Groningen (UCMG) among different departments. A cross-case analysis was used to analyze the difference between departments and methods.
Results: Thirteen interviews and twenty-five questionnaires were completed during this study. Twenty-two questionnaires were usa-ble for data analysis. There are multiple posi-tive and negative differences between both methods. Important difference were time-investment, scheduling, depth of information and social-cultural differences.
Conclusion: Team meetings in the HFMEA provide more in-depth information in complex processes than interviews. However, due to limitations of the HFMEA the modified light version, using interviews, provided to be an effectiveness alternative. It provides less depth than the HFMEA but still proves out to be the answer to scheduling problems and social-cultural differences between groups.


To top