Tamper-resistant vs. tamper-proof: There’s room for both at the table
Recently, I was looking at the quarterly newsletter from the Pecora Corporation, a company that manufactures sealants and similar products, some of which are used in the behavioral health/corrections facility environment. This is by no means a product endorsement, but rather a thumbs up for providing information that can be useful in plotting a way forward.
While I think I knew intrinsically that tamper-resistant and tamper-proof were not terms to be used interchangeably, I had never really given it a great deal of thought. So, when looking at the newsletter, my curiosity was immediately piqued by a link to a video that outlines the differences between the two product types. The video does a nice job of describing the considerations one might make when choosing between the two products. The video is pretty short (less than 2 minutes) but is worth sharing with folks in your organization that are involved with not only managing the physical environment but charged with managing the risk assessment process. I think it will help folks make better decisions when it comes to ensuring patients and staff are protected as effectively as possible. For those of you who are fans of the written word, the blog on the subject is also very well done.
In brief, tamper-resistant products are designed to deter tampering, making it more difficult but not impossible. They can be highly effective in situations where the goal is to create a significant barrier to tampering, thereby discouraging unauthorized access or interference. They are often more cost-effective and easier to implement compared to tamper-proof solutions.
On the other hand, tamper-proof solutions are designed to prevent tampering entirely. They offer the highest level of security, ensuring that any attempt to tamper is either impossible or immediately noticeable. These solutions are critical in situations where the stakes are high, and absolute security is paramount.
In many cases, the best approach may be to use a combination of both tamper-resistant and tamper-proof measures. This hybrid strategy can offer a balanced solution that leverages the strengths of each approach, providing both deterrence and prevention, which should dovetail nicely with mitigation strategies identified through the risk assessment process. When it comes to risk management in the physical environment, there’s really nothing like an absolute prevention, but, unfortunately, that’s not always possible. So, when we can’t employ an absolute, then the task becomes one of ensuring that staff charged with managing the environment understand the difference and (perhaps most importantly) how issues with tampering might manifest themselves. If they know what to look for before tamper-resistant becomes “tampered,” interventions can be applied to ensure that the safest possible environment is maintained.
About the Author: Steve MacArthur is a safety consultant with The Chartis Group. He brings more than 30 years of healthcare management and consulting experience to his work with hospitals, physician offices, and ambulatory care facilities across the country. He is the author of HCPro's Hospital Safety Director's Handbook and is an advisory board member for Accreditation and Quality Compliance Center. Contact Steve at stevemacsafetyspace@gmail.com.