Strengthen patient safety
Share the right reflexes to prevent adverse events.
Why this programme
A medication error, an identity not properly checked, incomplete information: patient safety depends on simple actions, repeated thousands of times. Care and administrative teams replay situations drawn from your protocols and your lessons learned, without ever pointing the finger.
The main objective of this standardisation is to prevent adverse events that may result from misunderstandings in communication between professionals.
What your teams experience
- The right patient: spot the patient identification errors slipped into a series of fictional records.
- The room of errors: find, in a projected scene, every risk hidden in a patient’s room.
- The medication pathway: put the steps back in the right order, from prescription to administration.
- Lessons learned: each team turns a fictional incident into a preventive action.
Each activity opens and closes with a projected cinematic sequence, personalised for your teams. The facilitator sets the pace: nothing moves forward without them.
What the company gains
Safety reflexes shared across departments, greater acceptance of adverse event reporting, and a culture that looks for causes rather than culprits.
At least 44,000 Americans die each year as a result of medical errors […] the number may be as high as 98,000.
Staging written for you
In your client area, a form specific to this programme collects your content: it is built into the challenges and cinematic sequences, exactly as you provide it. The look uses your logo and your colours. Teams are formed on the spot or based on your organisation chart.
Follow-up, up to D+30
Your follow-up dashboard stays with the programme, from the order to the final results.
- After the session: the session report, with the gap between the opening and closing measures.
- At D+7: a reminder asks a few key questions again, and the D+7 report shows what has been retained.
- At D+30: a second reminder, and the D+30 report shows what holds over time.
The sources of this programme
The published research that this programme's games, measures and debriefs refer to. You can check every reference.
- de Vries, E. N., Ramrattan, M. A., Smorenburg, S. M., Gouma, D. J., & Boermeester, M. A. (2008). The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: A systematic review. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 17(3), 216-223. 10.1136/qshc.2007.023622
- Westbrook, J. I., et al. (2010). Association of interruptions with an increased risk and severity of medication administration errors. Archives of Internal Medicine, 170(8), 683-690. 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.65
- Haynes, A. B., Weiser, T. G., Berry, W. R., et al. (2009). A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(5), 491-499. 10.1056/NEJMsa0810119
- Farnan, J. M., Gaffney, S., Poston, J. T., Slawinski, K., Cappaert, M., Kamin, B., & Arora, V. M. (2016). Patient safety room of horrors: A novel method to assess medical students and entering residents' ability to identify hazards of hospitalisation. BMJ Quality & Safety, 25(3), 153-158. 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004621
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Patient Safety Solutions (2007). Patient Identification. Patient Safety Solutions, vol. 1, solution 2, Organisation mondiale de la santé (rapport). cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/patient-safety/patient-safety-solutions/ps-solution2-patient-identification.pdf
- Sexton, J. B., Helmreich, R. L., Neilands, T. B., et al. (2006). The Safety Attitudes Questionnaire: Psychometric properties, benchmarking data, and emerging research. BMC Health Services Research, 6, 44. 10.1186/1472-6963-6-44
- Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
- Howard, G. S. (1980). Response-shift bias: A problem in evaluating interventions with pre/post self-reports. Evaluation Review, 4(1), 93-106. 10.1177/0193841X8000400105
- Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x
- Reason, J. (2000). Human error: Models and management. BMJ, 320(7237), 768-770. 10.1136/bmj.320.7237.768
- Edmondson, A. C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(1), 5-28. 10.1177/0021886396321001
- Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. 10.2307/2666999
- Tucker, A. L., & Edmondson, A. C. (2003). Why hospitals don't learn from failures: Organizational and psychological dynamics that inhibit system change. California Management Review, 45(2), 55-72. 10.2307/41166165
- Okuyama, A., Wagner, C., & Bijnen, B. (2014). Speaking up for patient safety by hospital-based health care professionals: A literature review. BMC Health Services Research, 14, 61. 10.1186/1472-6963-14-61
- Dekker, S. (2007). Just Culture: Balancing Safety and Accountability. Ashgate (ouvrage).
Further reading (2 references)
Other research we drew on to design this programme.
- Panagioti, M., Khan, K., Keers, R. N., et al. (2019). Prevalence, severity, and nature of preventable patient harm across medical care settings: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 366, l4185. 10.1136/bmj.l4185
- Keers, R. N., Williams, S. D., Cooke, J., & Ashcroft, D. M. (2013). Prevalence and nature of medication administration errors in health care settings: A systematic review of direct observational evidence. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 47(2), 237-256. 10.1345/aph.1R147
Shared foundations (9 references)
The mechanics of all our sessions (team play, the debrief, the before-and-after measure, spaced reminders) and the research that also underpins the other programmes in the same specialty or sector.
- Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 55(1), 231-245. 10.1177/0018720812448394
- Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(6), 1467-1478. 10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467
- Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 489-528. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x
- Organisation mondiale de la santé (2021). Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021-2030: Towards Eliminating Avoidable Harm in Health Care (rapport). iris.who.int/handle/10665/343477
- Hughes, A. M., Gregory, M. E., Joseph, D. L., et al. (2016). Saving lives: A meta-analysis of team training in healthcare. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(9), 1266-1304. 10.1037/apl0000120
- Weaver, S. J., Dy, S. M., & Rosen, M. A. (2014). Team-training in healthcare: A narrative synthesis of the literature. BMJ Quality & Safety, 23(5), 359-372. 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001848
- Neily, J., Mills, P. D., Young-Xu, Y., et al. (2010). Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical mortality. JAMA, 304(15), 1693-1700. 10.1001/jama.2010.1506
- King, H. B., Battles, J., Baker, D. P., et al. (2008). TeamSTEPPS: Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety. In K. Henriksen et al. (dir.), Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches, vol. 3 : Performance and Tools. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (rapport). www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK43686/
- Cook, D. A., Hatala, R., Brydges, R., et al. (2011). Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 306(9), 978-988. 10.1001/jama.2011.1234
Before you book
How is a Corporate Solutions experience different from team building?
It starts from a business objective, not an activity: onboarding new hires, preventing a risk, bringing your commitments to life. It is staged for your company, with your content, your figures and your brand. Your teams play in person, on their phones, while a big screen tells the story and a facilitator runs the room. And it is followed up: the session report, then the D+7 and D+30 reminders in your client area.
Do we need to install an app?
No. Participants scan a QR code and play in their phone's browser. No account, no password, no installation. It works on iPhone and Android.
Is there a limit on the number of participants?
No. The platform adapts to your headcount, from a small team to the whole company, in one or several rooms.