Abstract
Critical incident reviews are an integral part of modern psychiatric practice. The issue is central to the clinical governance agenda in the UK, yet there is widespread debate about their usefulness. There is a lack of systematic research into their impact on clinical outcomes, with most authors commenting on their form, their political implications, and whether they should exist at all. This article explores the historical basis to incident investigation, outlines an ‘ideal’ method of review and discusses the concepts of the learning organisation and root cause analysis. Further discussion focuses on what the objectives of critical incident review might be and whether organisations as a whole can learn from them.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
