Safety and Medical Devices: The Human Factors Perspective

  • Morris GordonEmail author


Whilst medical devices offer increasing fidelity and complexity that can form significant barriers to error, they open up new routes for errors and harm to occur. Much work in other industries has investigated the man machine interface and how devices can best be designed to account for such risks. This field of human factors is discussed in the context of healthcare and the state of the field reviewed.


Non-technical skills Man–machine interface Error Safety Psychology Harm Education Training Human factors engineering 


  1. 1.
    Donaldson, L. (2005). Patient safety: Do no harm. Perspectives in Health—Pan American Health Organization, 10, 1.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Drabkin, I. (1957). Medical education in ancient Greece and Rome. Academic Medicine, 32, 286–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hartwell, M. (2005). Medical negligence: Can doctors and nurses still rely on the doctrine that they know best? Legal Medicine (Tokyo), 7, 293–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Department of Health (DOH). (2000). An organisation with a memory. Available online at Accessed January 23, 2013.
  5. 5.
    Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M., & Donaldson, M. S. (Eds.). (2000). To err is human: Building a safer health system (Vol. 627). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Watcher, B. (2011). A game changing statistic 1 in 250. Available online at Accessed January 23, 2013.
  7. 7.
    National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA). (2012). Quarterly summaries. Available online at
  8. 8.
    Wong, B. M., Etchells, E. E., Kuper, A., Levinson, W., & Shojania, K. G. (2010). Teaching quality improvement and patient safety to trainees: a systematic review. Academic Medicine, 85, 1425–1439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Philibert, I. (2009). Physicians: Practical implications organisations to the patient hand-off by resident use of strategies from high-reliability. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 18, 261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Temple, J. (2010). Doctors’ training and the European working time directive. Lancet, 375(9732), 2121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rasmussen, J. (1999). The concept of human error: Is it useful for the design of safe systems in health care? In C. Vincent & B. de Moll (Eds.), Risk and safety in medicine (pp. 31–47). London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reason, J. (2000). Human error: Models and management. BMJ, 320, 768–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    NHS Kidney Care. (2012). Evaluation of the ‘hydration matters’ poster campaign in acute hospital trusts. Available at Accessed on September 9, 2013.
  14. 14.
    NHS Midland and East. (2012). I trust you to care. Available at Accessed on September 9, 2013.
  15. 15.
    Royal College of Nursing. (2010). Guidance on safe nurse staffing levels in the UK. Available at Accessed on September 9, 2013.
  16. 16.
    World Health Organisation. (2008). Patient safety workshop: Learning from error. Available at Accessed on September 9, 2013.
  17. 17.
    Bates, D. W., & Gawande, A. A. (2000). Error in medicine: What have we learned? Annals of Internal Medicine, 132(9), 763–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cohen, M. R. (2000). Why error reporting systems should be voluntary: They provide better information for reducing errors. BMJ, 320(7237), 728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hammond, K. R. (1996). Human judgement and social policy: Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kruger, D. J., Wang, X. T., & Wilke, A. (2007). Towards the development of an evolutionarily valid domain-specific risk-taking scale. Evolutionary Psychology, 5(3), 555–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reason, J. (1990). Human error. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    International Ergonomics Association. (2012). Definition of human factors. Available at Accesses on July 25, 2013.
  23. 23.
    Carayon, P., & Wood, K. E. (2010). Patient safety: The role of human factors and systems engineering. Study of Health Technology and Information, 153, 23–46.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clinical Human Factors Group. (2011). Towards a definition of human factors. Available online at Accessed January 23, 2013.
  25. 25.
    Catchpole, K. (2013). Spreading human factors expertise in healthcare: Untangling the knots in people and systems. BMJ Quality and Safety,. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bleetman, A., Sanusi, S., Dale, T., & Bruce, S. (2012). Human factors and error prevention in emergency medicine. Emergency Medicine Journal, 29, 389–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Russ, A., Fairbanks, R. J., & Karsh, B. T. (2013). The science of human factors: Separating fact from fiction. BMJ Quality and Safety,. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. (2006). Safer care improving patient safety. Available online at Accessed September 11, 2013.
  29. 29.
    Carroll, J. J. (1997). Physiological problems of bomber crews in the eighth air force during WWII. A research paper presented to air command and staff college, Maxwell, AL, USA. Available at Accessed September 11, 2013.
  30. 30.
    Dahm, M. (2006). Grundlagen der Mensch-Computer-Interaktion. München: Pearson Studium.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Flaspöler, E. (2009). Literature review. The human machine interface as an emerging risk. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. doi: 10.2802/21813.
  32. 32.
    Karsh, B. T. (2004, Oct). Beyond usability: Designing effective technology implementation systems to promote patient safety. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(5), 388–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Van Merriënboer, J. G., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: Design principles and strategies. Medical Education, 44, 85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gordon, M., Chandratilake, M., & Baker, P. (2013). Low fidelity, high quality: A model for e-learning. The Clinical Teacher, 10, 258–263. doi: 10.1111/tct.12008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Huang, Y., Li, X., & Zhang, J. (2015, August 5). Optimal design method to minimize user’s thinking mapping load in human–machine interactions. Work. Epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Larsson, P., & Niemand, M. (2015). Using sound to reduce visual distraction from in-vehicle human–machine interfaces. Traffic Injury Prevention, 16(Suppl 1), S25–S30. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2015.1020111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Barber, D. J., Reinerman-Jones, L. E., & Matthews, G. (2015, May). Toward a tactile language for human–robot interaction: Two studies of tacton learning and performance. Human Factors, 57(3), 471–490. doi: 10.1177/0018720814548063. Epub, August 28, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gordon, M., Baker, P., Catchpole, K., Darbyshire, D., & Schocken, D. (2015). Devising a consensus definition and framework for non-technical skills in healthcare to support educational design: A modified Delphi study. Medical Teacher, 37(6), 572–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gordon, M. (2014). Developing healthcare non-technical skills training through educational innovation and synthesis of educational research. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Salford. Available at

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 International License (, which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of MedicineUniversity of Central LancashirePrestonUK

Personalised recommendations