Comparing two safety culture surveys: Safety Attitudes Questionnaire and Hospital Survey on Patient Safety
University of Texas Medical School, University of Texas, Memorial Hermann Center for Healthcare Quality and Safety, 6410 Fannin St., UTPB 1100.45, Houston, TX 77030, USA. BMJ quality & safety
(Impact Factor: 3.99).
04/2012; 21(6):490-8. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000449
To examine the reliability and predictive validity of two patient safety culture surveys-Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) and Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS)-when administered to the same participants. Also to determine the ability to convert HSOPS scores to SAQ scores.
Employees working in intensive care units in 12 hospitals within a large hospital system in the southern United States were invited to anonymously complete both safety culture surveys electronically.
All safety culture dimensions from both surveys (with the exception of HSOPS's Staffing) had adequate levels of reliability. Three of HSOPS's outcomes-frequency of event reporting, overall perceptions of patient safety, and overall patient safety grade-were significantly correlated with SAQ and HSOPS dimensions of culture at the individual level, with correlations ranging from r=0.41 to 0.65 for the SAQ dimensions and from r=0.22 to 0.72 for the HSOPS dimensions. Neither the SAQ dimensions nor the HSOPS dimensions predicted the fourth HSOPS outcome-number of events reported within the last 12 months. Regression analyses indicated that HSOPS safety culture dimensions were the best predictors of frequency of event reporting and overall perceptions of patient safety while SAQ and HSOPS dimensions both predicted patient safety grade. Unit-level analyses were not conducted because indices did not indicate that aggregation was appropriate. Scores were converted between the surveys, although much variance remained unexplained.
Given that the SAQ and HSOPS had similar reliability and predictive validity, investigators and quality and safety leaders should consider survey length, content, sensitivity to change and the ability to benchmark when selecting a patient safety culture survey.
Available from: Majid Shojaee
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background and Aim: Offering health care by hospitals in critical situations is of great importance. Although after a disaster hospitals may be destroyed as well, many people go to the nearest hospital to get emergency medical services. Thus, hospital safety is an important issue for promotion of patient safety in the communities. Hence, in this study, hospital safety in some hospitals in Tehran in 2012 was evaluated. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed in Imam-Hossein, Taleghani, Modarres, Shohada, and Loghman Hospitals. The questionnaire was Hospital Safety Index (HIS) that includes five subscales and 145 indices for evaluation of hospital safety. Results: In this study, Modarres hospital had the lowest scores in all categories. The highest functional and non-structural scores were related to Imam-Hossein Hospital and the structural scores were higher in Taleghani Hospital. Also Shohada and Loghman Hospitals were in medium level. Conclusion: According to the obtained results, it may be concluded that hospital safety was in medium level in majority of hospitals in Tehran. Although the situation is not critical, the programming and prompt functioning would be required to improve hospital safety.
Available from: Anita Sabz
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In July 2011, UCLA Health System released its current time-out process protocol used across the Health System. Numerous interventions were performed to improve checklist completion and time-out process observance. This study assessed the impact of the current protocol for the time-out on healthcare provider's safety attitude and operating room (OR) safety climate.
All members involved in neurosurgical procedures in the main OR of the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center were asked to anonymously complete an on-line survey on their overall perception of the time-out process.
The survey was completed by 93/128 members of the surgical team. Overall, 98.9% felt that performing a pre-incision time-out improves patient safety. The majority of respondents (97.8%) felt that the team member introductions helped to promote a team spirit during the case. In addition, 93.5% felt that performing a time-out helped to ensure all team members were comfortable to voice safety concerns throughout the case. All respondents felt that the attending surgeon should be present during the time-out and 76.3% felt that he/she should lead the time-out. Unanimously, it was felt that the review of anticipated critical elements by the attending surgeon was helpful to respondents' role during the case. Responses revealed that although the time-out brings the team together physically, it does not necessarily reinforce teamwork.
The time-out process favorably impacted team members' safety attitudes and perception as well as overall safety climate in neurosurgical ORs. Survey responses identified leadership training and teamwork training as two avenues for future improvement.
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.