The development and validation of a human factors analysis and classification system for the construction industry

A novel framework for human factors analysis and classification system for medical errors (HFACS-MES)-A Delphi study and causality analysis

The healthcare system (HCS) is one of the most crucial and essential systems for humanity. Currently, supplying the patients' safety and preventing the medical adverse events (MAEs) in HCS is a global issue. Human and organizational factors (HOFs) are the primary causes of MAEs. However, there are limited analytical methods to investigate the role of these factors in medical errors (MEs). The aim of present study was to introduce a new and applicable framework for the causation of MAEs based on the original HFACS. In this descriptive-analytical study, HOFs related to MEs were initially extracted through a comprehensive literature review. Subsequently, a Delphi study was employed to develop a new human factors analysis and classification system for medical errors (HFACS-MEs) framework. To validate this framework in the causation and analysis of MEs, 180 MAEs were analyzed by using HFACS-MEs. The results showed that the new HFACS-MEs model comprised 5 causal levels and 25 causal categories. The most significant changes in HFACS-MEs compared to the original HFACS included adding a fifth causal level, named "extra-organizational issues", adding the causal categories "management of change" (MOC) and "patient safety culture" (PSC) to fourth causal level", adding "patient-related factors (PRF)" and "task elements" to second causal level and finally, appending "situational violations" to first causal level. Causality analyses among categories in the HFACS-MEs framework showed that the new added causal level (extra-organizational issues) have statistically significant relationships with causal factors of lower levels (Φc≤0.41, p-value≤0.038). Other new causal category including MOC, PSC, PRF and situational violations significantly influenced by the causal categories of higher levels and had an statistically significant effect on the lower-level causal categories (Φc>0.2, p-value<0.05). The framework developed in this study serves as a valuable tool in identifying the causes and causal pathways of MAEs, facilitating a comprehensive analysis of the human factors that significantly impact patient safety within HCS.

Cause Analysis of Unsafe Acts of Pilots in General Aviation Accidents in China with a Focus on Management and Organisational Factors

Objectives. General aviation (GA) safety has become a key issue worldwide and pilot errors have grown to be the primary cause of GA accidents. However, fewer empirical studies have examined the contribution of management and organizational factors for these unsafe acts. Flawed decisions at the organizational level have played key roles in the performance of pilots. This study provides an in-depth understanding of the management and organizational factors involved in GA accident reports. Methods. A total of 109 GA accidents in China between 1996 and 2021 were analysed. Among these reports, pilot-related accidents were analysed using the human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS) framework. Results. The significant effects of managerial and organizational factors and the failure pathways on GA accidents have been identified. Furthermore, unlike traditional HFACS-based analyses, the statistically significant relationships between failures at the organizational level and the sub-standard acts of the pilots in GA accidents were revealed. Conclusions. Such findings support that the GA accident prevention strategy that attempts to reduce the number of unsafe acts of pilots should be directed to the crucial causal categories at HFACS organizational levels: resource management, organizational process, failure to correct a known problem, inadequate supervision and supervisory violations.

Correlation in Causality: A Progressive Study of Hierarchical Relations within Human and Organizational Factors in Coal Mine Accidents

It has been revealed in numerous investigation reports that human and organizational factors (HOFs) are the fundamental causes of coal mine accidents. However, with various kinds of accident-causing factors in coal mines, the lack of systematic analysis of causality within specific HOFs could lead to defective accident precautions. Therefore, this study centered on the data-driven concept and selected 883 coal mine accident reports from 2011 to 2020 as the original data to discover the influencing paths of specific HOFs. First, 55 manifestations with the characteristics of the coal mine accidents were extracted by text segmentation. Second, according to their own attributes, all manifestations were mapped into the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), forming a modified HFACS-CM framework in China's coal-mining industry with 5 categories, 19 subcategories and 42 unsafe factors. Finally, the Apriori association algorithm was applied to discover the causal association rules among external influences, organizational influences, unsafe supervision, preconditions for unsafe acts and direct unsafe acts layer by layer, exposing four clear accident-causing "trajectories" in HAFCS-CM. This study contributes to the establishment of a systematic causation model for analyzing the causes of coal mine accidents and helps form corresponding risk prevention measures directly and objectively.

Barriers of Occupational Safety Implementation in Infrastructure Projects: Gaza Strip Case

Infrastructure projects are the foundation for essential public services and have an influential position in societal development. Although the role of infrastructure projects is substantial, they can involve complexities and safety issues that lead to an unsafe environment, and which impacts the project key stakeholders. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the barriers to implementing occupational safety in infrastructure projects in the Gaza Strip, which cause serious threats and reduce project performance. To evaluate the barriers, 39 items were highlighted and modified as per the construction context and environment, and which later were distributed in the form of a questionnaire, to get feedback from consultants and contractors. The analysis shows that in the safety policy barriers group, consultants and contractors both ranked the item “a contractor committed to an occupational safety program is not rewarded” first. In the management barriers group, consultants and contractors both ranked the item “safety engineer does not have significant powers, such as stopping work when needed” in the first place. In the behavior and culture barriers group, consultants and contractors both ranked the item “workers who are not committed to occupational safety are not excluded” in the first place. Overall, both consultants and contractors shared the same viewpoint in classifying the barriers in the working environment. The outcome of this study is beneficial for Palestinian construction industry policymakers, so they can monitor the highlighted barriers in on-going infrastructure projects and can modify the safety guidelines accordingly.