Article

Hospital safety climate and safety outcomes: is there a relationship in the VA?

VA Boston Healthcare System, MA, Boston University School of Public Health, MA, USA.
Medical Care Research and Review (Impact Factor: 3.01). 02/2010; 67(5):590-608. DOI: 10.1177/1077558709356703
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Strengthening safety climate is recognized as a necessary strategy for improving patient safety. Yet there is little empirical evidence linking hospitals' safety climate with safety outcomes.The authors explored the potential relationship between safety climate and Veterans Health Administration hospital safety performance using the Patient Safety Indicator (PSI) rates. Safety climate survey data were merged with hospital discharge data to calculate PSIs. Linear regressions examined the relationship between hospitals' safety climate and dimensions of safety climate with individual PSIs and a PSI composite measure, controlling for organizational-level variables. Safety climate overall was not related to the PSIs or to the PSI composite, although a few individual dimensions of safety climate were associated with specific PSIs. Perceptions of frontline staff were more closely aligned with PSIs than those of senior managers.

1 Bookmark
 · 
105 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Explicit attention to patient safety during surgical training is needed to improve patient safety. A positive safety climate is associated with greater patient safety and is a requisite for safety teaching at the workplace. The Safety Climate Survey (SCS) measures perceptions of safety climate. This study aims to take a first step in validating the SCS for use among surgical residents in the Netherlands and to highlight opportunities for safety climate improvement through changes in surgical training in the Netherlands. It therefore assesses (1) if the SCS can be used to assess surgical residents' perceptions of the safety climate in Dutch teaching hospitals; and (2) how, according to SCS results, these residents perceive the safety climate in Dutch teaching hospitals. In a cross-sectional study conducted in February 2011, a Dutch translation of the SCS was administered to all general surgical residents in the Netherlands. Face validity and internal consistency were assessed, as were overall mean, means per item and significant differences in means between different groups of respondents. In total, 306 of 390 (78%) residents completed the questionnaire. The SCS showed good face validity and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.87). Residents reported an overall mean of 3.95 (standard deviation 0.51) out of a maximum score of 5.00, and 52% reported an overall mean of 4.00 or higher. Women and residents working in university hospitals gave significantly lower scores. Significant differences were also found among hospitals and among regions. Majority of the items scored less than 4.00. The SCS is potentially useful to measure surgical residents' perceptions of the patient safety climate in Dutch teaching hospitals. There is considerable room for improvement of the patient safety climate. Surgical training should include better feedback, formal patient safety teaching sessions at the workplace and specific attention to patient safety during the introduction in a new hospital, and supervisors should encourage surgical residents to report any patient safety concern they may have.
    Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 11/2013; · 1.51 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rationale, aims and objectivesTo develop a reliable and valid questionnaire that can distinguish features of organizational culture for patient safety across subgroups such as hospitals, professions, management/non-management positions and units/wards.Methods We developed a Hospital Organizational Culture Questionnaire based on a conceptual framework incorporating items from a review of existing literature. The questionnaire was administered to hospital staff including doctors, nurses, allied health personnel, and administrative staff at six public hospitals in Japan. Reliability and validity were assessed through exploratory factor analysis, multitrait scaling analysis, Cronbach's alpha coefficient and multiple regression analysis using staff-perceived achievement of safety as the response variable. Discriminative power across subgroups was assessed with radar chart profiling.ResultsOf the 3304 hospital staff surveyed, 2924 (88.5%) responded. After exploratory factor analysis and multitrait analysis, the finalized questionnaire was composed of 24 items in the following eight dimensions: improvement orientation, passion for mission, professional growth, resource allocation prioritization, inter-sectional collaboration, responsibility and authority, teamwork, and information sharing. Construct validity and internal consistency of dimensions were confirmed with multitrait analysis and Cronbach's alpha coefficients, respectively. Multiple regression analysis showed that improvement orientation, passion for mission, resource allocation prioritization and information sharing were significantly associated with higher achievement in safety practices. Our questionnaire tool was able to distinguish features of safety culture among different subgroups.Conclusions Our questionnaire demonstrated excellent validity and reliability, and revealed distinct cultural patterns among different subgroups. Quantitative assessment of organizational safety culture with this tool may further the understanding of associated characteristics of each subgroup and provide insight into organizational readiness for patient safety improvement.
    Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 01/2014; 20. · 1.51 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We aimed to examine staff members' perceptions of communication within and between different professions, safety attitudes and psychological empowerment, prior to and after implementation of the communication tool Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) at an anaesthetic clinic. The aim was also to study whether there was any change in the proportion of incident reports caused by communication errors. A prospective intervention study with comparison group using preassessments and postassessments. Questionnaire data were collected from staff in an intervention (n=100) and a comparison group (n=69) at the anaesthetic clinic in two hospitals prior to (2011) and after (2012) implementation of SBAR. The proportion of incident reports due to communication errors was calculated during a 1-year period prior to and after implementation. Anaesthetic clinics at two hospitals in Sweden. All licensed practical nurses, registered nurses and physicians working in the operating theatres, intensive care units and postanaesthesia care units at anaesthetic clinics in two hospitals were invited to participate. Implementation of SBAR in an anaesthetic clinic. The primary outcomes were staff members' perception of communication within and between different professions, as well as their perceptions of safety attitudes. Secondary outcomes were psychological empowerment and incident reports due to error of communication. In the intervention group, there were statistically significant improvements in the factors 'Between-group communication accuracy' (p=0.039) and 'Safety climate' (p=0.011). The proportion of incident reports due to communication errors decreased significantly (p<0.0001) in the intervention group, from 31% to 11%. Implementing the communication tool SBAR in anaesthetic clinics was associated with improvement in staff members' perception of communication between professionals and their perception of the safety climate as well as with a decreased proportion of incident reports related to communication errors. ISRCTN37251313.
    BMJ Open 01/2014; 4(1):e004268. · 1.58 Impact Factor