As a human factors engineer in a healthcare facility, my primary role would be to assess areas where technology, tasks, or environmental factors could negatively impact patient and provider safety. Through careful observation and analysis, I would identify high-risk areas and procedures where small changes could mitigate hazards and prevent potential errors. Some initial assessments may involve analyzing workflow in high-volume clinical areas to identify inefficient processes or sources of disruption (Guastello, 2023). I would also review equipment design and user interfaces to pinpoint possible usability or training issues. Through statistical modeling of incident reports, particularly those involving accidental injuries or near-misses, I could determine where focused redesign efforts may have the most impact (Guastello, 2023)
One primary area of focus would be the intensive care unit, where complex patient conditions and time-sensitive treatment require optimized coordination among providers. I may shadow clinical teams to gain a richer understanding of communication barriers, technology challenges, and other environmental stressors impacting care (Karwowski & Zhang, 2021). Coupled with data on medical errors and adverse events specific to the ICU, I could propose targeted solutions such as reorganized nursing stations, redesigned equipment, standardized documentation forms, or enhanced alarms and alerts (Catchpole et al., 2019). Computerized provider order entry systems and infusion pumps are also a high priority since even minor usability flaws may harm (Manos et al., 2008; Koppel et al., 2008). Surveys and interviews with end users would provide essential insights into real-world frustrations and opportunities for improvement.
In the operating room, factors like lighting, distractions, and equipment positioning all influence the complex coordination required among surgeons and anesthesia professionals. Through detailed task analyses and videos of procedures, I may identify inefficient movements, sources of disruption, and ergonomic risks exacerbating fatigue and mistakes (Carayon et al., 2020). New room designs optimizing traffic flow, and the placement of frequently used devices could streamline workflows and free up mental resources. Similarly, post-surgical units involve multitasking nurses managing high-acuity patients with overlapping monitoring needs. Organizing the layout of medical devices, supply storage, and documentation tools could help avoid interruption-related errors and support safer prioritization of care (Catchpole et al., 2019).
Through human factors evaluations and targeted interventions, I would aim to develop resilient systems that empower healthcare providers to focus fully on what matters most – caring for patients (Hong et al., 2020). From designing more intuitive clinical technology to optimizing communication among team members, applying human factors science can help compensate for intrinsic limitations in cognition, memory, and physical stamina (Carayon et al., 2020). Continued assessment of modifications would ensure solutions address the appropriate issues while avoiding new hazards. Working closely with frontline clinicians, my role would directly support safer, more effective, and less stressful care delivery.
In addition to focusing on high-risk clinical areas, an important part of my work would involve assessing organizational factors that can indirectly influence patient safety outcomes (Hong et al., 2020). Medical errors are often the result of systemic deficiencies, not simply individual performance. I would evaluate how factors like staffing models, training protocols, scheduling practices, and institutional culture may introduce latent threats. For example, over time among resident physicians or fatigue among nurses working multiple consecutive shifts have been linked to higher complication rates (Karwowski & Zhang, 2021). Surveying employees about burnout and perceptions of leadership would provide insights into low-hanging fruit for reducing workplace stress. Analyzing factors contributing to near-misses or temporary workarounds chosen out of convenience rather than best practices could also reveal acute and chronic risks worthy of mitigation through policy changes (Catchpole et al., 2019). Ensuring a just culture supportive of transparency after adverse events is equally crucial for sustained improvements.
References
Carayon, P., Wooldridge, A., Hoonakker, P., Hundt, A. S., & Kelly, M. M. (2020, April). SEIPS 3.0: Human-centered design of the patient journey for patient safety. Applied Ergonomics, 84, 103033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103033
Catchpole, K., Bisantz, A., Hallbeck, M. S., Weigl, M., Randell, R., Kossack, M., & Anger, J. T. (2019, July). Human factors in robotic-assisted surgery: Lessons from studies ‘in the Wild.’ Applied Ergonomics, 78, 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.02.011
Guastello, S. J. (2023, March 31). Human Factors Engineering and Ergonomics. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003359128
Hong, S. R., Hullman, J., & Bertini, E. (2020, May 28). Human Factors in Model Interpretability: Industry Practices, Challenges, and Needs. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3392878
Karwowski, W., & Zhang, W. (2021, August 13). THE DISCIPLINE OF HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS. HANDBOOK OF HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119636113.ch1
write