Advertisement

Medical Surprise Anticipation and Recognition Capability: A New Concept for Better Health Care

  • Cato T. LaurencinEmail author
  • Aneesah McClinton
Perspective Article
  • 36 Downloads

Abstract

Predicting and preparing for the unforeseen is challenging. Medicine and health care are continuously changing based on science, technology, and regulation. This very process of change creates pathways for surprise and leaves us vulnerable to its impact. The armed forces have established strategies to identify and address surprising events, a framework that can be adapted to benefit the medical community. We introduce Medical Surprise Anticipation and Recognition Capability (SARC), adapted from an established military strategy. SARC is the process of addressing surprising events before they emerge. We explore the framework for mitigating surprise as developed by the Committee on Capability Surprise on U.S. Naval Forces. We recommend further exploration of this concept in health care as a potential asset in our quest towards high reliability.

Keywords

High reliability Quality Improvement Medicine Surprise Capability surprise 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Not applicable.

Funding

This study was supported by NIH Grant DP109349.

References

  1. 1.
    Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada. Federation of State Medical Boards. Medical Regulatory Authorities and the Quality of Medical Services in Canada and the United States [Internet]. New York, NY: Milbank Memorial Fund; 2008 [cited 2019 Apr 2]. Available from: https://www.milbank.org/wp-content/files/documents/0806MedServicesCanada/0806MedServicesCanada.pdf
  2. 2.
    Field RI. Why is health care regulation so complex? P T. 2008 Oct;33(10):607–8.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Institute of Medicine. The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health [Internet]. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. Available from:.  https://doi.org/10.17226/12956.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Laurencin C, Nair L. Next Generation Devices and Technologies Through Regenerative Engineering. In: Shorey R, Purnendu G, editors. Healthcare Engineering: Proceedings of CAETS 2015 Convocation on Pathways to Sustainability. Singapore: Springer Nature; 2017. p. 21–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McGrory K, Bedi N. HeartBroken [Internet]. Tampa Bay Times. 2018 [cited 2019 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.tampabay.com/projects/2018/investigations/heartbroken/all-childrens-heart-institute/
  6. 6.
    McGrory K, Bedi N. Top All Children’s executives resign following Times report on heart surgeries [Internet]. Tampa Bay Times. 2018 [cited 2019 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.tampabay.com/investigations/2018/12/11/top-all-childrens-executives-resign-following-times-report/
  7. 7.
    Bedi N, McGrory K. Regulators still not satisfied with All Children’s progress [Internet]. Tampa Bay Times. 2019 [cited 2019 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.tampabay.com/investigations/2019/05/01/regulators-still-not-satisfied-with-all-childrens-progress/
  8. 8.
    McGrory K, Koh E. Lawmakers approve measure to catch pediatric heart surgery problems [Internet]. Tampa Bay Times. 2019 [cited 2019 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2019/04/29/lawmakers-approve-measure-to-catch-pediatric-heart-surgery-problems/
  9. 9.
    McGrory K, Bedi N. Extra oversight for children’s heart surgery signed into law [Internet]. Tampa Bay Times. 2019 [cited 2019 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.tampabay.com/investigations/2019/06/26/extra-oversight-for-childrens-heart-surgery-signed-into-law/
  10. 10.
    Reason J. Human error: models and management. BMJ. 2000;320:768–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Institute of Medicine. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System [Internet]. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2000. Available from.  https://doi.org/10.17226/9728.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reason J. Managing the Risk of Organizational Accidents. Burlington: Ashgate; 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chassin MR, Loeb JM. High-Reliability Health Care: Getting There from Here. MilBank Q. 2013;91(3):459–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rochlin GI. Reliable Organizations: Present Research and Future Directions. J Conting Cris Manag. 1996;4(2):55–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roberts KH. New challenges in organizational research: high reliability organizations. Ind Cris Quaterly. 1989;3:111–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weick K, Sutcliffe K. Managing the Unexpected. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Josey-Bass; 2007.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hughes RG. Tools and Strategies for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety [Internet]. Hughes R, editor. Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 [cited 2019 Apr 2]. p. ch. 44. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2682/Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carthey J, De Leval MR, Reason JT. Institutional resilience in healthcare systems. Qual Heal Care. 2001;10:29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Defense Science Board. Report of the Defense Science Board 2008 Summer Study on Capability Surprise Volume I: Main Report [Internet]. Washington, DC; 2009 [cited 2019 Mar 7]. Available from: https://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2000s/ADA506396.pdfGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mills C, Goon P. PAK-FA, F-35, F-22, and Capability Surprise [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2019 Apr 10]. Available from: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-230210-1.htmlGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cancian MF. Coping with Surprise in Great Power Conflicts [Internet]. Center for Strategic and International Studies; 2018 [cited 2019 Apr 10]. Available from: https://csisprod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fspublic/publication/180227_Cancian_CopingWithSurprise_wAppen_Web.pdfGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    National Research Council. Responding to Capability Surprise : A Strategy for U.S. Naval Forces [Internet]. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2013. Available from:.  https://doi.org/10.17226/14672.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vincent C, Amalberti R. Safer healthcare: Strategies for the real world. Cham: Springer; 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Harris HR. Howard’s legendary LaSalle Leffall still going strong at 85 [Internet]. The Washington Post. 2015 [cited 2019 Jul 24]. Available from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/05/19/howards-legendary-dr-lasalle-leffall-still-going-strong-at-85/
  25. 25.
    Kardos M, Dexter P. A Simple Handbook for Non-Traditional Red Teaming [Internet]. Joint and Operations Analysis Division; 2017 [cited 2019 Mar 7]. Available from: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1027344.pdf
  26. 26.
    Mayberry RM, Nicewander DA, Qin H, Ballard DJ. Improving quality and reducing inequities: a challenge in achieving best care. Proc (Baylor Univ Med Cent). 2006;19(2):103–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century [Internet]. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2001. Available from:.  https://doi.org/10.17226/10027.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© W. Montague Cobb-NMA Health Institute 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Connecticut Convergence Institute for Translation in Regenerative EngineeringUConn HealthFarmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations