The Rhode Island (RI) Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Collaborative was designed to improve patient safety and clinical outcomes in adult ICUs through a unit-based patient safety program and evidenced-based practices. Few studies have shown how to draw on a strong safety culture to improve clinical outcomes. A study was conducted to (1) examine the impact of a Safety Attitudes Questionnaire Action Plan (SAQAP) on the 2008 Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) and (2) determine the impact of an SAQAP on ICU central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSIs) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) rates.
The SAQ was administered at 23 ICUs in 11 hospitals in fall 2007 and 2008. Units were surveyed as to whether they completed an SAQAP on the basis of 2007 SAQ results. Annual rates of infection were submitted as unadjusted monthly CLABSI infections per 1,000 line days and VAP infections per 1,000 ventilator days for 2007 and 2008.
SAQAPs were completed on 9 (39%) of the 23 units. Units that developed SAQAPs demonstrated higher improvement rates in all domains of the SAQ except working conditions. Improvements were close to statistical significance for teamwork climate (+18.4% in SAQAP units versus -6.4%, p = .07) and job satisfaction (+25.9% increase in SAQAP units versus +7.3%, p = .07). Units with SAQAPs decreased the CLABSI rates by 10.2% in 2008 compared with 2007, while those without SAQAP had a 2.2% decrease in rates (p = .59). Similarly, VAP rates decreased by 15.2% in SAQAP units, while VAP rates increased by 4.8% in units without SAQAP (p = .39).
Teams that developed SAQAPs improved their unit culture and clinical outcomes. An active, targeted intervention in culture can translate into improved outcomes for patients.
"A growing number of studies report on their value and use, both in the
US and internationally [5,6]. A recent study suggested that improvements in clinical outcomes
correlated positively with improvement in safety culture as measured by Safety
Attitude Questionnaire . However, researchers have noted the need for more standardized use of
terms and a greater understanding of how safety culture as measured is related to
other features of healthcare as well as the need to develop theoretical models to
explain the influence of culture on patient safety outcomes [8,9]. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: A Swedish version of the USA Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality "Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture" (S-HSOPSC) was developed to be used in both hospitals and primary care. Two new dimensions with two and four questions each were added as well as one outcome measure. This paper describes this Swedish version and an assessment of its psychometric properties which were tested on a large sample of responses from personnel in both hospital and primary care.
The questionnaire was mainly administered in web form and 84215 forms were returned (response rate 60%) between 2009 and 2011. Eleven per cent of the responses came from primary care workers and 46% from hospital care workers. The psychometric properties were analyzed using both the total sample and the hospital and primary care subsamples by assessment of construct validity and internal consistency. Construct validity was assessed by confirmatory (CFA) and exploratory factor (EFA) analyses and internal consistency was established by Cronbachs's alpha.
CFA of the total, hospital and primary care samples generally showed a good fit while the EFA pointed towards a 9-factor model in all samples instead of the 14-dimension S-HSOPSC instrument. Internal consistency was acceptable with Cronbach's alpha values above 0.7 in a major part of the dimensions.
The S-HSOPSC, consisting of 14 dimensions, 48 items and 3 single-item outcome measures, is used both in hospitals and in primary care settings in Sweden for different purposes. This version of the original American instrument has acceptable construct validity and internal consistency when tested on large datasets of first-time responders from both hospitals and primary care centres. One common instrument for measurements of patient safety culture in both hospitals and primary care settings is an advantage since it enables comparisons between sectors and assessments of national patient safety improvement programs. Future research into this version of the instrument includes comparing results from patient safety culture measurements with other outcomes in relation to safety improvement strategies.
BMC Health Services Research 08/2013; 13(1):332. DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-13-332 · 1.71 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
The purpose of this study was to explore the variability in safety culture dimensions within and between Swiss and US clinical areas.
Cross-sectional design. The 30-item Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) was distributed in 2009 to clinicians involved in direct patient care in medical and surgical units of two Swiss and 10 US hospitals. At the unit level, results were calculated as the percentage of respondents within a unit who reported positive perceptions. MANOVA and ANOVA were used to test for differences between and within US and Swiss hospital units.
In total, 1370 clinicians from 54 hospital units responded (response rate 84%), including 1273 nurses and 97 physicians. In Swiss hospital units, three SAQ dimensions were lower (safety climate, p=0.024; stress recognition, p<0.001; and perceptions of management, p<0.001) compared with US hospital units. There was significant variability in four out of six SAQ dimensions (teamwork climate, safety climate, job satisfaction and perceptions of unit management) (p<0.001). Moreover, intraclass correlations indicate that these four dimensions vary more at the unit level than hospital level, whereas stress recognition and working conditions vary more at the hospital level.
The authors found differences in SAQ dimensions at the country, hospital and unit levels. The general emphases placed on teamwork and safety climate in quality and safety efforts appear to be highlighting dimensions that vary more at the unit than hospital level. They suggest that patient safety improvement interventions target unit level changes, and they support the emphasis being placed on teamwork and safety climate, as these vary significantly at the unit level across countries.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Improving the quality and safety of intensive care unit (ICU) care in the United States is a significant challenge for the future. Obtaining improvement in systems of care is difficult given the reactionary mode physicians tend to enter when dealing with moment-to-moment crises. It will be important to implement quality and safety measures that are already supported by evidence. Improvement of device safety will be critical to reducing the large number of device-related complications that occur in US ICUs. Prospective collection of adverse events with rigorous analysis will be important to allow systematic errors to be exposed and corrected.
Surgical Clinics of North America 12/2012; 92(6):1369-86. DOI:10.1016/j.suc.2012.08.007 · 1.88 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.