Patient safety culture at the unit level of a tertiary hospital in South Africa: a survey study

Background. Patient safety research is scarce in developing countries. Estimates of patient harm due to healthcare processes in resource-poor settings are thought to be greater than those in developed countries. Ideally, errors in healthcare should be seen as opportunities to improve the future quality of care. Objective. This study aimed to investigate patient safety culture within high-risk units of a tertiary hospital in South Africa. Methods. A quantitative, descriptive, cross-sectional methodology, using a survey questionnaire that measured 10 safety dimensions and one outcome measure among clinical and nursing staff, was employed. Results. Two hundred participants completed the survey questionnaire. Areas of strength identified by the participants included organizational learning (91.09%), staff attitudes (88.83%), and perceptions of patient safety (76.65%). Dimensions that have potential for improvement included awareness and training (74.04%), litigation (73.53%), feedback and communication about errors (70.77%), non-punitive response to error reporting (51.01%), size and tertiary level of the hospital (53.76%), and infrastructure and resources (58.07%). The only dimension identified as weak was teamwork and staffing (43.72%). In terms of the patient safety grade, respondents graded their own units highly but graded the hospital as a whole as having a poor patient safety grade. Conclusion. There are still significant gaps in the quality of care provided at this tertiary hospital. The current patient safety culture is perceived as punitive in nature with regard to reporting adverse events. It is advised that targeted patient safety improvements be made, followed by further investigation

Factors Associated with Retention in HIV Care at Sediba Hope Medical Centre

Background: Lost to follow-up (LTFU) is a major challenge that hinders the success of antiretroviral treatment (ART). Objective: To identify factors conducted to a low LTFU rate.Methods: We conducted a two-part descriptive and quantitative study. Part 1 comprised interviews with clinic staff to determine their perspectives on LTFU and to establish the clinic's follow-up procedures for patients on ART. Part 2 of the study was a retrospective review of clinic and patient records. LTFU patients were identified and those with contact details were contacted for telephonic interview to determine if they were still on ART and/or their reasons for becoming LTFU.Results: A low LTFU rate (7.9%; N = 683) was identified. Work-related stress; and lack of transport and funds were reported reasons for LTFU. Monthly visits; non-adherent defaulters and LTFU patients were tracked by an electronic system (SOZO). Factors contributing to high rates of retention in care were: location of the clinic in the inner city; thus in close proximity to patients' homes or work; clinic operating on Saturdays; which was convenient for patients who could not attend during the week; an appointment/booking system that was in place and strictly adhered to; a reminder SMS being sent out the day before an appointment; individual counselling sessions at each visit and referrals where necessary; and a stable staff complement and support group at the clinic.Conclusion: Achieving a low LTFU rate is possible by having a patient-centred approach and monitoring systems in place