Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Computers in healthcare
cases on medical negligence
Computers in healthcare
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Computers in healthcare
The Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) created the Therac-25 radiation therapy machine (Death and Denial). The major innovation of this machine is that it was much more computer-controlled than the previous machines of its kind. This enabled technicians to spend less time setting up the machine and more time working directly with patients. The reduced setup time also increased the number of patients that were able to be treated in one day (ComputingCases). Patients undergoing treatment from the Therac-25 are in communication with the machine operator (located in a separate room) through AV monitors (Death and Denial).
The software for the Therac-25 was an evolution from the two previous machines, the Therac-6 and the Therac-20. The development of the software was completed by only one programmer. The Therac-25 relied much more heavily on its software than the previous versions, which relied mostly on the operator. This machine also changed the way safety checks were performed; critical safety checks were included in the hardware and software of previous machines, but only software on the Therac-25 (Death and Denial, The Software).
The Therac-25 was released to market in 1983 and is still in use today (ComputingCases). “Between June 1985 and January 1987, six patients were seriously injured or killed by unsafe administration of radiation from the Therac-25 medical linear accelerator” (Death and Denial).
The first accident occurred on a 61-year old woman who was at a follow-up appointment after a breast tumor was removed. She felt a burning sensation and told the operator “you burned me”. She developed swelling and reddening, but the AECL declared this a normal treatment reaction and not a machine malfunction. Her condition wor...
... middle of paper ...
...perator, who again accidentally chose the wrong mode and used the up arrow and enter to correct the problem and administer the treatment. Again, the “malfunction 54” error message occured. The AV equipment was now working, and the operator heard a loud noise and a moan, which resulted in checking on the patient. The patient fell into a coma and died three weeks later (Death and Denial, The Accidents).
The sixth and final accident was supposed to receive small position verification doses. After the machine halted with an error message, the operator pressed the button to continue, and the machine displayed that it had delivered the correct dose. The patient complained of pain, and died from complications resulting from a radiation overdose three months later (Death and Denial, The Accidents).
Works Cited
http://users.csc.calpoly.edu/~jdalbey/SWE/Papers/THERAC25.html
Wickens, Lee, Liu and Gordon-Becker (2014) defined human error as the “inappropriate human behavior that lowers levels of system effectiveness or safety”. Human error consists of mistake, which is the intended action that turned out to be inappropriate; slip, which is the unintended incorrect act; and lapse, the omission of nonintentional errors (Wickens, Lee, Liu & Gordon-Becker, 2014). There are various instances of human error demonstrated in the case description including, the nurse entering the MRI room with the oxygen tank (mistake), failure to check the level of oxygen in the tank (lapse) and the oxygen tank accidentally flying over to Michael’s head
Hospitals are busy places, and with so much going on it is hard to believe that mistakes are not made. However, there are some accidents that should never happen. Such events have been termed ‘never events’ because they are never supposed to happen. This term was first introduced by Ken Kizer, MD, in 2001 (US, 2012). The Joint Commission has classified never events as sentinel events and asks that hospitals report them. A sentinel event is defined as, “an unexpected occurrence involving death or serious physiological or psychological injury, or the risk thereof” (US, 2012). Never events are termed sentinel events because in the past 12 years 71% of the events reported were fatal (US, 2012). Because these events are never supposed to happen, many insurance companies will not reimburse the hospitals when they occur. A study in 2006, showed that the average hospital could experience a case of wrong-site surgery, one example of a never event, only once every 5 to 10 years (US, 2012). This study illustrates how rare a never event is. Hospitals do not want these never events to happen any more than a patient does. To help prevent these errors, hospitals have created policies that, if followed, will minimize the possibility of a mistake. The consequences of never events are devastating and because of this the goal is to make sure that they are eradicated from hospitals and medical facilities.
On May 20th, the patient, Mr. Ard, experienced nausea, shortness of breath, and pain while being treated in the hospital (Pozgar, 2014). The patient’s wife, Mrs. Ard, attempted many times to reach a nurse by pressing the nurse call button (Pozgar, 2014). Once the nurse finally responded, anti-nausea medication was administered (Pozgar, 2014). Mrs. Ard continued to monitor her husband’s situation, and felt as if the nausea and shortness of breath were getting worse (Pozgar, 2014). Mrs. Ard continued to ring the nurse call button for approximately 1.25 hours prior to a response from a nurse (Pozgar, 2014). A code was called, and Mr. Ard did not survive (Pozgar, 2014).
Hospital medical errors can involve medicines (e.g., wrong drug, wrong dose, bad combination), an inaccurate or incomplete diagnosis, equipment malfunction, surgical mistakes, or laboratory errors. High medical error rates with serious consequences occurs in intensive care units, operating rooms, and emergency departments; but, serious errors that harmed patients may have prevented or minimized. Understand the nature of the error
Since the beginning of the propitious world, the core aspect that keeps it thriving is the propensity for people to discover innovations; however, progress of the past is, systematically, detrimental to the future. Not long after the revolutionary invention of the X-ray in the late 19th Century, an unprecedented number of medical examiners noticed (unknown to the time) radiation burns all over their body; decades later, an extraordinary surge in cancer cases had arisen. Perhaps, during the course of these years, scientists and researchers desired to further progress the x-ray (into the immense subsidiaries that are here today), and disregarded any flaws in the apparatus. This systematic inclination continues into the present time as Gary Marshall and Shane Keene notes in their 2007 article, “New technologies allow for patients to be overexposed routinely, and also allow for repeats to be taken quickly, making it easier for a technologist to multiply the patients dose without considering the implications” (5). The gaffes of radiology are present not only in the diagnostic setting, but also in the surgical and therapeutic areas. Working with radiation, it is imperative that the staff is aware of mistakes that are potentially fatal not only for patients, but themselves. It is especially important for medical radiologists to be cognizant of pediatric patients. The standard practice of pediatric radiology in the United States is to follow the step-by step formula from which adult patients are treated and diagnosed. There are copious consequences for following this technique since a child naturally has less body mass and a weaker immune and lymphatic system to manage radiation and its adverse effects. Medical radiology, being a...
There are a few types of medical errors discussed in Patient Safety Principles & Practice. One of them is an error of execution. An error of execution is when a correct action does not proceed as intended. It is a failure of a planned action to be completed as first intended. It occurs unintentionally during an automatic performance of patient care. This error is almost always observable at the patient and caregiver interface.
Chasing Zero is a documentary which was meant to both educate the viewer on the prevalence of medical harm as well as to enlighten both the public and health care providers on the preventability of these events (Discovery, 2010). The documentary expounded on the fact each year more people die each year from a preventable medical error than die due to breast cancer, motor vehicle accidents or AIDS (Institute of Medicine, 1999). Medical harm can result from adverse drug events, surgical injuries, wrong-site surgery, suicides, restraint-related injuries, falls, burns, pressure ulcers and mistaken patient identities (Institute of Medicine, 1999). Incidences of medical error have been reported in the media for many years. The most startling revelation in the documentary is how common medical errors are and how preventable they are.
...iately discovered and the patient was fine, but had there been proper communication between the healthcare staff, such blunders could have been avoided altogether (Dolanksy, 2013).
After review of the timeline of the events surrounding Mr. B, there are several causative factors that led to this sentinel event. These are inappropriate staffing, inability to identify trends of deterioration, policy for conscious sedation was not followed, inadequate observation and monitoring, failure to respond to alarms, inadequate home medication evaluation, medication dosing, appropriate medication administration times, and failure to start cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a timely manner.
Radiation has changed drastically over the past 118 years. Exposures are much quicker, digital imaging is a possibility in most hospitals, and most importantly, radiation protection. Many people have died, some without realizing that they were killing themselves, for the advancement of x-rays. Because of these advancements physicians are able to tell patients what is going on very quickly and without much delay. It is very important to remember the 3 cardinal rules: distance, time and shielding.
Radiation therapists work closely with patients to fight cancer. According to Health Care Careers, Oncologists, Dosimetrists and nurses are some of the professionals that a radiation therapist works with while caring for a cancer patient. This group of professionals will determine a specialized treatment plan. The first step usually includes a CT scan performed by a radiologist to find the exact area that needs to be targeted with x-rays. Next, the therapist uses a special machine that emits radiation called a Linear Accelerator. They use this machine during a treatment called external beam therapy. During this process, the Linear Accelerator will project x-rays at targeted cancer cells or tumors. Another therapist will be in a different room monitoring the patient’s viral signs until the procedure is over. The external therapy l...
Once upon a time, an AECL inexperienced coder was given a hefty job to write a code for a radiation therapy machine. Due to lack of experience, he completed the code with many loop holes and errors. Even though, he knew that his code was imperfect, he did not say anything to his company. His flaws were not even noticed by AECL as they did not independently review the software code. The problem with the machine was that the high-power electron beam was activated instead of the intended low power beam. This resulted in 100 times intended radiation being given to the patients. One of the victim of the machine was Ray, an accountant suffering from cancer. When Therac – 25 fired an intense radiation on him, he felt as if he was electrocuted. He
Keeping patients safe is essential in today’s health care system, but patient safety events that violate that safety are increasing each year. It was only recently, that the focus on patient safety was reinforced by a report prepared by Institute of medicine (IOM) entitled ” To err is human, building a safer health system”(Wakefield & Iliffe,2002).This report found that approx-imately 44,000 to 98,000 deaths occur each year due to medical errors and that the majority was preventable. Deaths due to medical errors exceed deaths due to many other causes such as like HIV infections, breast cancer and even traffic accidents (Wakefield & Iliffe, 2002). After this IOM reports, President Clinton established quality interagency coordination task force with the help of government agencies. These government agencies are responsible for making health pol-icies regarding patient safety to which every HCO must follow (Schulman & Kim, 2000).
The radiotherapy is not a very new technology history reveals that the German physicist Wilhelm Roentgen discovered radiation therapy after the discovery of x-rays in 1895. The World’s first Radiation Oncologist (therapist) was Emil Grubbe a medical student who irradiated a cancer patient in (Dartmouth, February 1896). The radiation ...
As a student nurse, I learned to give subcutaneous injections. The procedures were clear. However, one time I was busy and I forgot to double check the patients’ name. The result was that I gave Ms. Schmid, Ms. Schmidt’s injection. The names are equal, except one letter. This caused confusion and by not following the right procedures, I made that mistake. My inappropriate behaviour could have led to fatal health consequences for the patient. The good news was the dose and the medication were too low to affect the patients’ health. However, the patient must be monitored and the incidence recorded.