↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

High stakes and high emotions: providing safe care in Canadian emergency departments

Overview of attention for article published in Open access emergency medicine OAEM, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
High stakes and high emotions: providing safe care in Canadian emergency departments
Published in
Open access emergency medicine OAEM, January 2017
DOI 10.2147/oaem.s122646
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samina Ali, Denise Thomson, Timothy A D Graham, Sean E Rickard, Antonia S Stang

Abstract

The high-paced, unpredictable environment of the emergency department (ED) contributes to errors in patient safety. The ED setting becomes even more challenging when dealing with critically ill patients, particularly with children, where variations in size, weight, and form present practical difficulties in many aspects of care. In this commentary, we will explore the impact of the health care providers' emotional reactions while caring for critically ill patients, and how this can be interpreted and addressed as a patient safety issue. ED health care providers encounter high-stakes, high-stress clinical scenarios, such as pediatric cardiac arrest or resuscitation. This health care providers' stress, and at times, distress, and its potential contribution to medical error, is underrepresented in the current medical literature. Most patient safety research is limited to error reporting systems, especially medication-related ones, an approach that ignores the effects of health care provider stress as a source of error, and limits our ability to learn from the event. Ways to mitigate this stress and avoid this type of patient safety concern might include simulation training for rare, high-acuity events, use of pre-determined clinical order sets, and post-event debriefing. While there are physiologic and anatomic differences that contribute to patient safety, we believe that they are insufficient to explain the need to address critical life-threatening event-related patient safety issues for both adults and, especially, children. Many factors make patient safety during critical medical events distinct from general patient safety issues, but it is, perhaps, this heightened high-stress, emotional climate that is the most distinct and important part of all. We believe that consideration of this concept is essential when discussing safety improvement in critical medical events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 22 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 17%
Psychology 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 25 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,518,326
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Open access emergency medicine OAEM
#122
of 230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,477
of 421,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open access emergency medicine OAEM
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.