Question 1 · Law, Ethics & Human Factors · Moderate
Thirty minutes after a helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) mission, the crew realise that the patient received ten times the intended dose of intravenous fentanyl; naloxone was needed and the patient is now stable in hospital. The whole crew is still on the base, recollections are fresh, and the base lead wants to capture what happened and start learning today, before the crew disperses to different rotas. Under the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF), which learning response best fits this situation?
- AA patient safety incident investigation, completed within six months
- BA multidisciplinary team review, held one to three months from now
- CA thematic review of all drug errors across the service in the past year
- DA root cause analysis identifying the single root cause of the error
- EA swarm huddle with the staff involved, started as soon as possible
Show answer
Answer: E
A swarm huddle with the staff involved, started as soon as possible
PSIRF asks organisations to choose learning responses proportionately. NHS England's guide to responding proportionately describes the swarm huddle as designed to be initiated as soon as possible after an event, as a multidisciplinary discussion in which staff gather information about what happened and why as quickly as possible, which is exactly what the base lead wants while the crew and their recollections are together. A multidisciplinary team review supports teams to learn from incidents that occurred in the significant past or where it is more difficult to collect staff recollections, which is the opposite of this situation. A patient safety incident investigation (PSII) is the in-depth review of a single incident or cluster; PSIIs should take no longer than six months, but that must not become a new default target. A thematic review looks for common links or themes across a cluster of incidents rather than responding to one event. The guide states that root cause analysis has consistently failed to deliver benefits of the scale and quality needed, and PSIRF methods explore multiple contributory factors instead of a single cause. The incident must still be reported, and the guide reminds organisations that where such incidents involve moderate or greater harm they must fulfil their Duty of Candour obligations.
Where this comes from
- NHS England — A guide to responding proportionately to patient safety incidentsNHS England, PSIRF supporting guidance, version 1.3 (September 2025)·Learning response methods: swarm huddle“designed to be initiated as soon as possible after an event”Open PDF at page 14
- NHS England — A guide to responding proportionately to patient safety incidentsNHS England, PSIRF supporting guidance, version 1.3 (September 2025)·Learning response methods: MDT review“patient safety incidents that occurred in the significant past”Open PDF at page 14
- NHS England — A guide to responding proportionately to patient safety incidentsNHS England, PSIRF supporting guidance, version 1.3 (September 2025)·Timeframes for learning response methods“no longer than six months, but this must not become a new default target”Open PDF at page 19
- NHS England — A guide to responding proportionately to patient safety incidentsNHS England, PSIRF supporting guidance, version 1.3 (September 2025)·Tools to respond to broad patient safety issues: thematic review“A thematic review may be useful for understanding common links, themes or issues”Open PDF at page 17
- NHS England — A guide to responding proportionately to patient safety incidentsNHS England, PSIRF supporting guidance, version 1.3 (September 2025)·Is root cause analysis 'system-based'?“has consistently failed to deliver benefits of the scale and quality needed”Open PDF at page 4
- NHS England — A guide to responding proportionately to patient safety incidentsNHS England, PSIRF supporting guidance, version 1.3 (September 2025)·Duty of candour“organisations must fulfil their Duty of Candour obligations”Open PDF at page 17