The development and psychometric evaluation of a safety climate measure for primary care

National Health Service Education for Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Quality and Safety in Health Care (Impact Factor: 2.16). 12/2010; 19(6):578-84. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2008.031062
Source: PubMed


Building a safety culture is an important part of improving patient care. Measuring perceptions of safety climate among healthcare teams and organisations is a key element of this process. Existing measurement instruments are largely developed for secondary care settings in North America and many lack adequate psychometric testing. Our aim was to develop and test an instrument to measure perceptions of safety climate among primary care teams in National Health Service for Scotland.
Questionnaire development was facilitated through a steering group, literature review, semistructured interviews with primary care team members, a modified Delphi and completion of a content validity index by experts. A cross-sectional postal survey utilising the questionnaire was undertaken in a random sample of west of Scotland general practices to facilitate psychometric evaluation. Statistical methods, including exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and Cronbach and Raykov reliability coefficients were conducted.
Of the 667 primary care team members based in 49 general practices surveyed, 563 returned completed questionnaires (84.4%). Psychometric evaluation resulted in the development of a 30-item questionnaire with five safety climate factors: leadership, teamwork, communication, workload and safety systems. Retained items have strong factor loadings to only one factor. Reliability coefficients was satisfactory (α = 0.94 and ρ = 0.93).
This study is the first stage in the development of an appropriately valid and reliable safety climate measure for primary care. Measuring safety climate perceptions has the potential to help primary care organisations and teams focus attention on safety-related issues and target improvement through educational interventions. Further research is required to explore acceptability and feasibility issues for primary care teams and the potential for organisational benchmarking.

Download full-text


Available from: Paul Bowie, Jan 07, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: Knowledge about safety climate is fundamental to improving patient safety in health care organizations. Because individual and organizational factors influence the safety climate, we conducted a health care survey of German family practices so we could analyze the impact of the professional group, the professional experience of practice staff, and practice characteristics on perceptions of the safety climate. Methods: We wrote to health care assistants and doctors in 1,800 randomly selected family practices in Germany and asked them to complete a newly developed and validated Frankfurt Patient Safety Climate Questionnaire. We conducted a descriptive analyses of items and climate factors, as well as regression analysis, to identify potential predictors of the safety climate in family practice. Results: The response rate from the participating practices was 36.1%. Safety climate was perceived to be generally positive with the exception of the factors of error management and perception of the causes of errors. We discovered that whether or not the entire team had taken part in the survey had a positive influence on most factors. Doctors had more positive perceptions of 4 of 7 factors addressed to both professions. Male participants and doctors showed the most willingness to admit they had made an error. Conclusions: Though the safety climate in German family practices was positive overall, health care professionals' use of incident reporting and a system's approach to errors was fairly rare. When evaluating the safety climate in primary health care practices, respondents' individual characteristics, as well as organizational features, should be taken into account.
    The Annals of Family Medicine 07/2013; 11(4):355-62. DOI:10.1370/afm.1500 · 5.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To develop and validate a rubric assessment instrument for use by pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) faculty to evaluate PEM fellows and for fellows to use to self-assess. This is a prospective study at a PEM fellowship program. The assessment instrument was developed through a multistep process: (1) development of rubric format items, scaled on the modified Dreyfus model proficiency levels, corresponding to the 6 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies; (2) determination of content and construct validity of the items through structured input and item refinement by subject matter experts and focus group review; (3) collection of data using a 61-item form; (4) evaluation of psychometrics; (5) selection of items for use in the final instrument. A total of 261 evaluations were collected from 2006 to 2007; exploratory factor analysis yielded 5 factors with Eigenvalues >1.0; each contained ≥4 items, with factor loadings >0.4 corresponding with the following competencies: (1) medical knowledge and practice-based learning and improvement, (2) patient care and systems-based practice, (3) interpersonal skills, (4) communication skills, and (5) professionalism. Cronbach α for the final 53-item instrument was 0.989. There was also significant responsiveness of the tool to the year of training. A substantively and statistically validated rubric evaluation of PEM fellows is a reliable tool for formative and summative evaluation.
    12/2010; 2(4):523-9. DOI:10.4300/JGME-D-10-00083.1
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective. To identify, review, and evaluate survey instruments used to assess teamwork, a process critical to delivering quality care, so as to facilitate high quality research on this topic. Data sources. The ISI Web of Knowledge database, which includes articles from MEDLINE, Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index.Study design. We conducted a systematic review of articles published before January 2010 to identify survey instruments used to measure teamwork and determine their psychometric validity.Data extraction. We identified relevant articles using the search terms team, teamwork, work groups, or collaboration, in combination with survey or questionnaire.Principal findings. We found 36 scales that measured teamwork; only 9 scales met all of the criteria for psychometric validity. Twelve of the 36 scales have shown significant relationship to non-self-report outcomes of interest. Each of these 12 scales assessed some dimension of the quality of social interactions between members. All but one also assessed some dimension of the quality of task-related interactions.Conclusions. Numerous survey instruments exist to measure teamwork. Few have demonstrated all of the psychometric properties recommended for use, and there is inconsistency in conceptualizations of teamwork. More research is needed to develop and refine measures of teamwork for reliable use by researchers and practitioners/managers.
    Medical care 05/2011; 53(4). DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1838538 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Show more