Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por eng |
Título da fonte: | Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
Texto Completo: | https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319 |
Resumo: | Introduction: Managing risks means, in the case of risks with negative effects, having them under control to mitigate or eliminate them, if possible, or in the case of risks with positive effects, turning them into opportunities. The Adolfo Lutz Institute (IAL) establishes documents and implements and maintains a management system in accordance with option A of ISO/IEC 17025: 2017. Thus, risk management is one of the requirements to be met. In order to fulfill this requirement, the IAL started the implementation of the risk management process using the Failure Mode, Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) tool. As the methodology was considered complex by the collaborators, this tool was abandoned and only the brainstorming was used for the identification step, and the probability and impact analysis at the risk analysis for the assessment stage. Objective: To assess the level of implementation of the risk management process in the IAL and identify the main difficulties involved in this process. Method: 74 risk matrix forms filled out by the various sectors of the institution were analyzed. Results: There was a 76.3% adherence to the implementation of risk management and the main difficulties encountered in the risk management process were: identification of the risks, including identification of risks with positive effects, selection of an indicator associated with risk, and proposal of actions to treat risks. Conclusions: To implement the risk management process, the use of simpler tools should be recommended when the team maturity level is still low or intermediate. Another point to be considered for the successful implementation of this process is strengthening of the understanding of risks by everyone in the organization. In IAL, the risk management process is in the risk monitoring phase; the next step is to review the risk mapping initially done. |
id |
FIOCRUZ-9_8eb43f5dec14e7118c1abace4991b20b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1319 |
network_acronym_str |
FIOCRUZ-9 |
network_name_str |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratoryProcesso de implantação da gestão de riscos em um laboratório de saúde públicaRisk ManagementQuality ImprovementPublic Health LaboratoryGestão de RiscosMelhoria de QualidadeLaboratório de Saúde PúblicaIntroduction: Managing risks means, in the case of risks with negative effects, having them under control to mitigate or eliminate them, if possible, or in the case of risks with positive effects, turning them into opportunities. The Adolfo Lutz Institute (IAL) establishes documents and implements and maintains a management system in accordance with option A of ISO/IEC 17025: 2017. Thus, risk management is one of the requirements to be met. In order to fulfill this requirement, the IAL started the implementation of the risk management process using the Failure Mode, Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) tool. As the methodology was considered complex by the collaborators, this tool was abandoned and only the brainstorming was used for the identification step, and the probability and impact analysis at the risk analysis for the assessment stage. Objective: To assess the level of implementation of the risk management process in the IAL and identify the main difficulties involved in this process. Method: 74 risk matrix forms filled out by the various sectors of the institution were analyzed. Results: There was a 76.3% adherence to the implementation of risk management and the main difficulties encountered in the risk management process were: identification of the risks, including identification of risks with positive effects, selection of an indicator associated with risk, and proposal of actions to treat risks. Conclusions: To implement the risk management process, the use of simpler tools should be recommended when the team maturity level is still low or intermediate. Another point to be considered for the successful implementation of this process is strengthening of the understanding of risks by everyone in the organization. In IAL, the risk management process is in the risk monitoring phase; the next step is to review the risk mapping initially done.Introdução: Gerenciar riscos significa, no caso de riscos com efeitos negativos, tê-los sob controle de forma a mitigá-los ou eliminá-los, se possível, ou, no caso de riscos cujos efeitos são positivos, transformá-los em oportunidades. O Instituto Adolfo Lutz (IAL) estabelece, documenta, implementa e mantém um sistema de gestão de acordo com a opção A da norma ABNT NBR ISO/IEC 17025:2017. Dessa forma, a gestão de riscos é um dos requisitos a ser atendido. Para cumprir esse requisito, o IAL iniciou a implantação do processo de gerenciamento de riscos utilizando a ferramenta Análise de Modo, Efeito e Criticidade da Falha (FMECA), porém a metodologia foi considerada complexa pelos colaboradores e, por isso, houve a necessidade de abandoná-la e utilizar apenas o brainstorming, na etapa de identificação dos riscos, e a análise de probabilidade e impacto, na etapa de análise e avaliação dos riscos. Objetivo: Avaliar o nível de implantação do processo de gestão de riscos no IAL e identificar as principais dificuldades envolvidas nesse processo. Método: Analisou-se 74 formulários de matriz de risco preenchidos pelos diversos setores da instituição. Resultados: Verificou-se uma adesão de 76,3% pelos setores, e as principais dificuldades encontradas no processo de gestão de riscos foram: identificação dos riscos propriamente dita, incluindo a identificação de risco com efeito positivo, seleção de um indicador associado ao risco e proposta de ação para tratar o risco. Conclusões: Para a implantação do processo de gestão de riscos, a utilização de ferramentas mais simples deve ser preconizada quando o nível de maturidade da equipe ainda é baixo ou intermediário. Outro ponto a ser considerado para o sucesso da implantação desse processo é o fortalecimento da compreensão dos riscos por todos da organização. No IAL, o processo de gerenciamento de riscos encontra-se na fase de monitoramento dos riscos, sendo que a próxima etapa consiste na revisão do mapeamento de riscos feito inicialmente.Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde2020-02-27info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion"Peer-reviewed article""Artículo revisado por pares""Artigo avaliado pelos pares"application/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/131910.22239/2317-269X.01319Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 8 No. 1 (2020): February; 31-39Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 8 Núm. 1 (2020): Febrero; 31-39Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 8 n. 1 (2020): Fevereiro; 31-392317-269Xreponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debateinstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZporenghttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319/1126https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319/1196Copyright (c) 2020 Vigilância Sanitária em Debate: Sociedade, Ciência & Tecnologia (Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology) – Visa em Debatehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKira, Carmen SilviaFonseca, Larissa Germano2023-06-27T15:12:10Zoai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1319Revistahttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebatePUBhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/oaiincqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br2317-269X2317-269Xopendoar:2023-06-27T15:12:10Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory Processo de implantação da gestão de riscos em um laboratório de saúde pública |
title |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory |
spellingShingle |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory Kira, Carmen Silvia Risk Management Quality Improvement Public Health Laboratory Gestão de Riscos Melhoria de Qualidade Laboratório de Saúde Pública |
title_short |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory |
title_full |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory |
title_fullStr |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory |
title_full_unstemmed |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory |
title_sort |
Implementation of risk management in a public health laboratory |
author |
Kira, Carmen Silvia |
author_facet |
Kira, Carmen Silvia Fonseca, Larissa Germano |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fonseca, Larissa Germano |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Kira, Carmen Silvia Fonseca, Larissa Germano |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Risk Management Quality Improvement Public Health Laboratory Gestão de Riscos Melhoria de Qualidade Laboratório de Saúde Pública |
topic |
Risk Management Quality Improvement Public Health Laboratory Gestão de Riscos Melhoria de Qualidade Laboratório de Saúde Pública |
description |
Introduction: Managing risks means, in the case of risks with negative effects, having them under control to mitigate or eliminate them, if possible, or in the case of risks with positive effects, turning them into opportunities. The Adolfo Lutz Institute (IAL) establishes documents and implements and maintains a management system in accordance with option A of ISO/IEC 17025: 2017. Thus, risk management is one of the requirements to be met. In order to fulfill this requirement, the IAL started the implementation of the risk management process using the Failure Mode, Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) tool. As the methodology was considered complex by the collaborators, this tool was abandoned and only the brainstorming was used for the identification step, and the probability and impact analysis at the risk analysis for the assessment stage. Objective: To assess the level of implementation of the risk management process in the IAL and identify the main difficulties involved in this process. Method: 74 risk matrix forms filled out by the various sectors of the institution were analyzed. Results: There was a 76.3% adherence to the implementation of risk management and the main difficulties encountered in the risk management process were: identification of the risks, including identification of risks with positive effects, selection of an indicator associated with risk, and proposal of actions to treat risks. Conclusions: To implement the risk management process, the use of simpler tools should be recommended when the team maturity level is still low or intermediate. Another point to be considered for the successful implementation of this process is strengthening of the understanding of risks by everyone in the organization. In IAL, the risk management process is in the risk monitoring phase; the next step is to review the risk mapping initially done. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-02-27 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion "Peer-reviewed article" "Artículo revisado por pares" "Artigo avaliado pelos pares" |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319 10.22239/2317-269X.01319 |
url |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.22239/2317-269X.01319 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por eng |
language |
por eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319/1126 https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1319/1196 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 8 No. 1 (2020): February; 31-39 Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 8 Núm. 1 (2020): Febrero; 31-39 Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 8 n. 1 (2020): Fevereiro; 31-39 2317-269X reponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debate instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) instacron:FIOCRUZ |
instname_str |
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) |
instacron_str |
FIOCRUZ |
institution |
FIOCRUZ |
reponame_str |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
collection |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
incqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br |
_version_ |
1797042045400907776 |