IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v24y2021i6p771-779.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the formal risk assessment practice in hospitals in England

Author

Listed:
  • Gulsum Kubra Kaya
  • James Ward
  • Anna Pearman
  • John Clarkson

Abstract

In England, hospitals routinely conduct a formal risk assessment practice to ensure the safety of patients and staff. However, although specific criticisms have been made on the practice, few investigated the formal risk assessment practice in the literature. This study investigates the risk assessment policies and procedures of one hundred hospitals in the English National Health Service (NHS) through content analysis. Findings revealed that hospitals provided varied descriptions of the terms risk and risk assessment. The concept of risk was often defined to be an undesired event, and risk assessment was often explained with the involvement of risk control step. Despite the variety in the descriptions of the risk terms, all hospitals recommended following similar steps to undertake risk assessments. Risk matrices- and therefore risk scoring – are at the heart of the formal practice, which increases the possibility of wrong risk prioritisation. This study provides several recommendations for the improvement of current guidelines by considering both Safety-I and Safety-II approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Gulsum Kubra Kaya & James Ward & Anna Pearman & John Clarkson, 2021. "Evaluation of the formal risk assessment practice in hospitals in England," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 771-779, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:24:y:2021:i:6:p:771-779
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2020.1775682
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2020.1775682
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2020.1775682?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:24:y:2021:i:6:p:771-779. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.