Deficient crisis-probing practices and taken-for-granted assumptions in health organisations

Deon V. CanyonCurtin Health Innovation Research Institute and the School of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, AustraliaCorrespondence[email protected]

Ashmita AdhikariSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Thomas CorderySchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Philippe Giguère-SimmondsSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Jessica HuangSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Helen NguyenSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Michael WatsonSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Daniel YangSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

show all

Deficient crisis-probing practices and taken-for-granted assumptions in health organisations

Table 1. Percentages of responding organisations that institute mandatory or discretionary probing into activities and processes, that reward proving, that have formal training, and that probe for assumptions

Table 2. The percentage of organisations that conduct training sessions or simulations for crisis preparedness by training frequency

Table 3. The percentage of organisations that conduct training sessions or simulations for specific types of crises

Table 4. The percentage of organisations that conduct training sessions or simulations that test for capabilities ranging from specific crises to entire systems

Information for

Open access

Opportunities

Help and information

Your download is now in progress and you may close this window

Login or register to access this feature

Deficient crisis-probing practices and taken-for-granted assumptions in health organisations

Figures & data

Table 1. Percentages of responding organisations that institute mandatory or discretionary probing into activities and processes, that reward proving, that have formal training, and that probe for assumptions

Table 2. The percentage of organisations that conduct training sessions or simulations for crisis preparedness by training frequency

Table 3. The percentage of organisations that conduct training sessions or simulations for specific types of crises

Table 4. The percentage of organisations that conduct training sessions or simulations that test for capabilities ranging from specific crises to entire systems

Related research

To cite this article:

Download citation

Information for

Open access

Opportunities

Help and information

Keep up to date