Application of the PDCA cycle in university laboratories safety management

To address the inadequacies in management of safety hazards at Sun Yat-sen University, this study innovatively introduced and extensively applied the plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle theory. This approach was used to construct a precise, sustainable, and systematic closed-loop management system for laboratory safety hazards. The core value of this system lies in achieving full-cycle, dynamic governance of safety hazards and progressively enhancing the hazard management capabilities of university laboratories.

A four-dimensional dynamic management model was constructed to encompass strategy formulation, rectification implementation, inspection and supervision, and continuous improvement. This model established a hierarchically nested and collaboratively interconnected management network, ensuring comprehensive closed-loop management control of the four core elements of laboratory safety: personnel, materials, environment, and management. A target-oriented strategy was formulated in Stage P by identifying key hazards, conducting multidimensional root-cause analysis, establishing actionable rectification objectives, and systematically planning hazard identification and rectification strategies. This approach clarified the overall direction, defined key tasks, and outlined principles for resource allocation. In Stage D, precision in implementation was achieved through a graded early-warning mechanism that distinguished different risk levels and guided differentiated rectification measures. Thorough process tracing was mandated to identify root causes and assign explicit accountability, ensuring accurate corrective action and responsibility alignment. In Stage C, a dual-track mechanism integrating data-driven verification and supervision was established to monitor and validate the sustained effectiveness of hazard rectifications. In Stage A, effective practices that had been proven through implementation were systematically consolidated, and safety culture development was reinforced to elevate overall safety awareness and competence. Meanwhile, unresolved issues and newly emergent risks underwent in-depth root-cause analysis to support the optimization of rectification strategies, thereby driving the management system toward higher levels of refinement and adaptability.

The implementation of a closed-loop management system for laboratory safety hazards based on the PDCA cycle theory yielded substantial outcomes: (1) The overall number of laboratory safety hazards markedly decreased, the occurrence rate of repeated hazards was substantially reduced, the upward trend of basic safety hazards was contained, and critical hazards were effectively controlled; (2) The capacity of individual laboratories to manage risk sources, identify and rectify safety hazards, and respond to emergencies was significantly enhanced, demonstrating a strengthened ability for autonomous safety prevention and control; (3) The closed-loop management system comprehensively encompassed the core elements of personnel, materials, environment, and management. It established 13 distinct and operable closed-loop pathways that ensured the substantive implementation, rigorous verification, and continuous tracking of corrective actions.

The implementation of the PDCA cycle management resulted in a substantial reduction in the overall incidence of safety hazards and the occurrence rate of repeated hazards. Additionally, it enhanced laboratories’ capacity for self-identification, prevention, and continual improvement. Consequently, the effectiveness of closed-loop safety hazard management was substantially improved. The PDCA cycle management system provides a replicable tiered management framework and a precise rectification pathway, offering a valuable reference for improving laboratory safety management systems in universities.