ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2022
A human factors approach to quality improvement in oxygen prescribing.
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Oxygen on Arrival: An Audit of Prescription Practices in the Emergency Assessment Unit.Cureus · 2025Article
- Using FRAM visualisations in quality improvement projects: identifying and testing strategies to improve anticoagulant use in the perioperative process.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025Article
- Principles for the conduct of human factors/ergonomics in healthcare: a scoping study of the published evidence.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Initiative to improve oxygen prescribing and oxygen delivery to patients in the emergency department of a national referral hospital.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Can guidelines rein in oxygen use? A retrospective cross-sectional study using routinely collected data.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023Article
- A Quality Improvement Study to Improve Oxygen Prescription in the PICU of a Tertiary Care Centre in Delhi, India.Cureus · 2023Article
- Digital healthcare in COPD management: a narrative review on the advantages, pitfalls, and need for further research.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The safe hospital administration of oxygen has been shown to improve outcomes for specific patient groups, including those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Oxygen prescribing is therefore recognised as a quality standard within the COPD Clinical Audit of the National Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Programme. Oxygen prescription within our hospital electronic prescribing system showed poor compliance, despite previous quality improvement (QI) interventions. Using the functional resonance analysis method (FRAM), a human factors methodology, alongside existing QI approaches allowed capture of everyday work ('work-as-done') using qualitative data. This confirmed the complexity of the socio-technical healthcare system in which care is delivered and the variability of steps in the process, and provided new potential interventions to improve the safe administration of oxygen. The use of human factors tools within QI projects may help bridge normative models of work-as-prescribed and inductive models of work-as-done to support improvement and sustainability of care delivery interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.