ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding the patient safety culture in Chinese hospitals. This study aims to assess the patient safety culture in Peking University Cancer Hospital and to identify opportunities for improving the organization's safety culture. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in April 2018 and 2019, respectively. Data on patient safety culture were collected from clinical and administrative staffs using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC). RESULTS: Twelve composite dimension variables were hierarchically clustered. Three highest positive response dimensions include 'Organizational Learning and continuous improvement' (92.9%), 'Teamwork within units' (89.7%), and 'Hospital management support for patient safety' (83.7%), while 3 lowest positive response dimensions included 'Frequency of events reported' (43.9%), 'Non-punitive response to error' (51.1%), 'Communication openness' (52.2%), and 'Staffing' (53.7%). Compared to the average scores of the United States, the scores of the Peking University Cancer Hospital was significantly lower on 'Communication openness' and 'Frequency of events reported'. After targeted continuous improvement based on results in 2018, all 12 dimensions surprisingly increased in the safety culture conducted in 2019. CONCLUSION: Inadequate feedback and communications about error and lack of communication openness are key challenges for patient safety in the delivery of care in this hospital. Results of this baseline survey indicate the need for a modified approach and attention to context when designing interventions aimed at improving the safety culture in this organization.
Subject(s)
Cancer Care Facilities , Patient Safety , Quality Improvement , Safety Management , China , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Care Surveys , Hospital Administration , Hospitals, University , Humans , Male , Patient Safety/standards , Safety Management/organization & administration , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
AIMS: A discussion of partnership in the context of family-centred care in the acute paediatric setting, through a critical analysis of partnership models. BACKGROUND: Paediatric healthcare practitioners understand the importance of family-centred care, but struggle with how to translate the core tenets into action and are confused by several rival terms. Partnering relationships are included in definitions of family-centred care, yet less is known about strategies to fully engage or support parents in these partnerships. A rigorous examination of concepts embedded in family-centred care such as partnership may provide a better understanding of how to implement the broader concept and support exemplary care in today's clinical practice environment. DESIGN: Discussion paper. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search (January 2000 - December 2014) performed on CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE, Sociological Abstracts and PsychINFO using keywords partnership, family-centred care and conceptual framework. Eligible references were drawn from the databases, reference lists and expert sources. Eight models met inclusion criteria and had currency and relevance to the acute paediatric setting. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses should continue exploring partnership in various paediatric contexts given the wide-ranging definitions, lack of operational indicators and need for stronger relational statements in current models. An examination of key strategies, barriers and facilitators of partnership is recommended. CONCLUSION: One partnership model had both high overall maturity and best fit with family-centred care principles. All models originate from Western and developed countries, indicating that future partnership models should be more geographically, culturally and economically diverse.
