Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T12:17:56.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Root cause analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Gwen Adshead*
Affiliation:
Broadmoor Hospital, Crowthorne, Berkshire RG45 7EG
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Columns
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © 2005. The Royal College of Psychiatrists.

We all look forward to Homicide Inquiries, mandated by the Department of Health Circular HSG(94)27 (Department of Health, 1994) being replaced or modernised as soon as possible, since there seems to be very little evidence that the enormous costs of these inquiries are justified by the benefits. Root cause analysis, as described by Neal et al (Psychiatric Bulletin, March 2004, 28, 75-77), may offer useful alternatives. However, reading their article left me with two doubts, both of which relate to the notion of ‘logical relationships’ between different ideas or issues. It is important that logical decisions are taken in medical practice, since this is one of the legal tests of good-enough medical practice. However, I would raise two concerns; first not everybody would agree on what constitutes a ‘logical relationship’. For example Neal et al suggest in their first figure that there is a ‘logical relationship’ between failure to diagnose and treat an emerging psychotic illness and suicide. However, to make such a statement is already to have completed the point of the inquiry without establishing that there is a logical relationship. Furthermore, it could be argued that the whole point of an inquiry is to establish whether there is a relationship or not between two events, and to bear in mind the possibility that there are lots of different types of relationships between events, including the possibility of no relationship.

The other aspect that is sometimes left out of ‘logic’ is the application and understanding of strong feelings. We sometimes make decisions (which in retrospect seem illogical) because we are moved by powerful feelings, usually negative ones of fear, anxiety and hostility. Post-incident inquiries frequently meet and are moved by similar feelings, and those feelings affect the way that they perceive logical relationships and analyse them. Although it seems that root cause analysis might provide a more systematic way of looking at the evidence that comes before inquiries, I am not convinced from Neal's article that they will deal with these other aspects.

References

Department of Health (1994) Guidance on the Discharge of Mentally Disordered People and their Continuing Care in the Community. Health Services Circular HSG(94)27. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.