Article

Patient Safety Dialogue: Evaluation of an Intervention Aimed at Achieving an Improved Patient Safety Culture

Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Sweden.
Journal of Patient Safety (Impact Factor: 0.88). 09/2011; 7(4):185-92. DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e318230e702
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Patient Safety Dialogue, a local intervention inspired by walk round-style approaches, was implemented in 2005 in a Swedish county council to achieve a positive patient safety culture in health care. This paper evaluates the results and changes after 5 years of the Patient Safety Dialogue in 50 departments (37 medical and 13 psychiatric) in 3 hospitals.
The patient safety culture maturity was rated on 5 levels that correspond with the Manchester Patient Safety Assessment Framework. The assessment was based on information supplied by the departments and discussions between clinical leaders and staff members with special patient safety assignments and representatives from a patient safety unit. Three patient safety areas were assessed: hospital-acquired infections, outcome measurements, and general patient safety. Each department was assessed 3 times: at baseline and at follow-ups at 18 and 36 months. Average scores were calculated for each of the 3 safety areas on all occasions. The departments were classified into 3 types of trajectories on the basis of the development of their scores over time.
More than two-thirds of the departments attained higher scores in round 3 than in round 1. Seventy-eight percent of the departments in the general patient safety area were categorized as continuously improving or developing, compared with 68% for outcome measurement and 50% for hospital-acquired infection. Approximately one-third was categorized as nonimproving, with scores in round 3 lower than or equal to the scores in round 1. The medical departments had higher scores than the psychiatric departments in all rounds.
Most of the 50 departments were evaluated to have improved their patient safety culture during the 5 years of the Patient Safety Dialogue, suggesting that the intervention is effective in supporting an improved patient safety culture. However, one-third of the departments did not improve during the 5-year study period.

2 Followers
 · 
118 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to measure safety culture, examine variations among neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), and assess the associations with caregiver characteristics. A cross-sectional design was used, utilizing the Arabic version of the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire, administered to all 305 nurses and physicians working in the 16 NICUs in the West Bank. There were 204 participants, comprising of mainly nurses (80.4%), women (63%), 30 years or younger (62.6%), holding a bachelor's degree or more (66.7%), and with at least 5 years of experience in the profession (60.3%). Safety Attitudes Questionnaire mean domain scores ranged from 71.22 for job satisfaction to 63 for stress recognition on a 100-point scale; the scores varied significantly among NICUs (P < .05). About 85% of the participants rated the safety grade either excellent or very good; 71.0% did not report any event in the past year. We found large variations in safety culture within and between a comprehensive sample of Palestinian NICUs. The findings suggest the need for a customized approach that builds on existing strengths and targets areas of opportunities for improvement to optimize health care delivery to the most vulnerable of patients, sick newborns in the NICU setting.
    Journal of critical care 07/2013; 28(5). DOI:10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.06.002 · 2.19 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The measurement of safety culture in healthcare is generally regarded as a first step towards improvement. Based on a self-assessment of safety culture, the Frankfurt Patient Safety Matrix (FraTrix) aims to enable healthcare teams to improve safety culture in their organisations. In this study we assessed the effects of FraTrix on safety culture in general practice. We conducted an open randomised controlled trial in 60 general practices. FraTrix was applied over a period of 9 months during three facilitated team sessions in intervention practices. At baseline and after 12 months, scores were allocated for safety culture as expressed in practice structure and processes (indicators), in safety climate and in patient safety incident reporting. The primary outcome was the indicator error management. During the team sessions, practice teams reflected on their safety culture and decided on about 10 actions per practice to improve it. After 12 months, no significant differences were found between intervention and control groups in terms of error management (competing probability=0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.63, p=0.823), 11 further patient safety culture indicators and safety climate scales. Intervention practices showed better reporting of patient safety incidents, reflected in a higher number of incident reports (mean (SD) 4.85 (4.94) vs 3.10 (5.42), p=0.045) and incident reports of higher quality (scoring 2.27 (1.93) vs 1.49 (1.67), p=0.038) than control practices. Applied as a team-based instrument to assess safety culture, FraTrix did not lead to measurable improvements in error management. Comparable studies with more positive results had less robust study designs. In future research, validated combined methods to measure safety culture will be required. In addition, more attention should be paid to evaluation of process parameters. Implemented actions and incident reporting may be more appropriate target endpoints. German Clinical Trials Register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS) No. DRKS00000145.
    BMJ quality & safety 08/2013; 23(1). DOI:10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001899 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although speaking up to protect patients is a key ethical and moral mandate for nurses, silence still prevails in many situations. On the basis of concepts of safety culture, generational theory, personal cultural literature, advocacy theory, oppressed group theory, and moral distress theory, the author conducted a literature review and offers a new theoretical framework. The proposed theory identifies primary factors of speaking up: generational, personal culture, and organizational.
    Journal of nursing care quality 07/2014; 30(1). DOI:10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000081 · 1.09 Impact Factor
Show more